Sigma are just a fantastic brand. They are forcing the big boys into making better lenses because in the past there was a tendency to rest on their laurels. I love supporting them as their Art series is in general absolutely top notch. The petal lens hod allows the hood to extend a little further and controlling flare when shooting towards the light source without causing vignetting as the source is usually above the lens rather than on the side.
I guess I completely missed the time zeiss was considered anything but one the best and more expensive. So what I'm saying is I don't see how your statement makes any sense.
@@paulgood2218 the similarity is that zeiss use to be technically a 3rd party but was held to such a high regard as a first party manufacturer. Sigma is becoming that. Many are choosing sigma over first party sony glass or panasonic glass
@@baraaamir7891 zeiss was never the budget option . Zeiss is still this generation Zeiss , voightlander is another hi end 3rd party manufacturer. Sigma is still now as it was then the budget 3rd party option . Zeiss was better than a lot of the 1st party lens. And cost more. Sigma is almost as good and sometimes as good and cost less .
Thanks @jared Polin, was looking for some decent comparison for the a7600 and the lenses sets that are available. This helped a bit :) the sigma kits and Sony sets that are offered in the shop near by.
@@froknowsphoto Recently I bought the 1.4 version and I'm very happy with it. A few weeks ago the 1.2 showed up on the market, so I was wondering which is the 'best'. But probably you are right, saving me about 600 US $ 😎😎
I am almost certain the reason the Sony appears to be a longer focal length (at around 7:30 and onward) is due to focus breathing. It's the same reason why many superzooms don't look like their "true" focal lengths compared to prime lenses at close to minimum focusing distance and longer focal lengths.
It’s probably because he had breathing comp turned on. It crops in a bit. Can only do it with native lenses, so the sigma (which has notably better focus breathing in general) is not being compensated
Just bought the Sony 1.2 after weighing up the two lens, although I don't have a camera capable of the higher shoot speed at the moment I thought I might in the future, so a bit of future proofing plus other reviews have mentioned the extra snappiness in focusing of the Sony version, I was lucky enough to get it real cheap too, £1249 through an outlet in the UK!.
Nikon User: After shooting the Nikon 35 1.8, 35 Tamron 1.4 with adapter, and owning all the 1.2's I can say theres a larger difference between 1.8 to 1.4 than 1.4 to 1.2...idk...it just seems so. You are very right Jared! I did a styled shoot today and shot the whole thing on a 50 1.2...something special about it!
I dont know if you read this. Maybe its helpful for your Next Videos. You were confused because the Sony Photo was Little Bit closer and you were wondering if it is maybe a 48mm. It is because the Lens is a Little Bit shorter, Like you mentioned before. Thats the Small difference you wondering about.
Hey! just got an RV. What do you mean slow? as in, it can only shoot 11fps? I ask this because maybe I can save my money and just not get the GM lenses haha.
@@darioaguilarrayon7658similair decision on my side. jumped from A to E mount and got an RIV. Now it stands between the Sigma 1.2 or the Sony GM. Shops actually dont have it in the inventory yet, said that inshop prices could be a bit under 1500€ but i could also get the sony used with warranty.
That’s what I want to go with Sony 3rd party lenses are great for Sony E mount. What about Nikon they don’t even have a native 50mm 1.4 s for the z mount that really sucks
The bokeh blur is stronger, and you get that extra "oomph" for night photography. If you're not sure, then you'd probably be fine with the 1.4. People doing concerts, portraits, and weddings would be going for the 1.2 over the 1.4 generally.
The cost of switching system will be far greater than the difference of the lower price of this lens. Wanting to switch just because of the price of one lens, is ridiculous.
@@caleidoowdym? If you’re selling your canon gear or whatever it is you’ll get about the same price for used Sony gear. Shoot if you’re coming from Leica then you’ll be getting money back for switching lol
@@ambition2959Good point. Also, leaving Canon for Sony means many more options for lenses, including cheaper third party ones, instead of pricey RF ones. And you may alsi get the Tamron 35 -150 F2 - 2.8 too!
@@ambition2959 If brand A has a lens that is €500 cheaper than the one your current brand is offering and you decide to sell all your current gear (bodies, lenses, accessories, ...) and you buy all the same stuff again new from brand A, including the lens that is a bit cheaper, you will have lost way more than €500, way more than the price difference with buying the lens new from your current brand. Math can't be more obvious than this.
If I buy the Sigma today I will spend $150 less than what I have paid for my Sony 50mm f/1.2 after 15% Black Friday discount + 200 euro from 2 cumulating rebates from Sony. So yes, the Sigma is less expensive but if you buy the Sony at the right time you could have a massive discount. I'm from Europe btw.
focal length is a measurement of the optical center of a lens NOT its FOV Jared come on you know this, and because of this you will often see differences from moderate to major in FOV of the exact same focal length - In Cinema Glass this is more common of an occurrence.
Sigma’s old DSLR glass and their initial mirrorless offerings (where they took DSLR lenses and slapped adapters on them) definitely qualified for the oversized distinction, but I really appreciate that decreased size and weight seems to be one of their main priorities with all their new mirrorless releases. Even though mirrorless doesn’t really need to compete against DSLR for size nowadays, I appreciate that manufacturers are still trying to make things even more compact.
I won't professionals, but I will leave the 35mm and 50mm for later date. I will be shooting most of my portrait with Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 MK1 and 70-200mm f2.8 GMII. Acceptable, no complain from people, some ppl do not like the f1.2 bokehness in their photos :). In the future, I will wait for the price of the Sony 50mm f1.2 to drop.
Great review. But it seems you're getting a bit..tired...of the L Mount Alliance Echo Chamber- it seemed...forced. That bit needs new energy- it's a moment I look forward to in every lens review, so double dow on the excitement of hearing your celebratory echo!
The HOOD. That is why I want the Sony GM. Ok I have heard so many good things that the Sony 50mm f1.2 was THEE reason I switched from Canon to Sony. Just have not been able to buy the sony 50 f1.2 yet.
Art lenses are some of the best lenses on the market topping even some native lenses. And unfortunately this Sigma 50mm 1.2 is not a true 50mm. Maybe this is how they manage it to make it smaller than the rest.
@@alainalain6454 49!! It’s more like 46, I know it’s not a big deal and only shows when compared to a 50mm. But still I would rather have a 50mm than a 46mm.
@@TheTigers00001 Matt compared between Tamron Sony and Nikon, his finding was Nikon being the longest then Sony then Tamron. So I doubt very much Sony to be 52mm.. Tamron was definitely the shortest and definitely not 50mm, and it’s more noticeable when shooting closer. Yes no one is going to notice in the field, but still something to mention. With that said I would still buy this Tamron over the Nikon just for the size. I hope Tamron make a 50mm 1.2 for Nikon z mount.
As a Nikon shooter I’m so jealous of this 50mm 1.2 that weights less than 40lbs.
It will be available in Z mount
It will be but expect a higher price bump
Sigma are just a fantastic brand. They are forcing the big boys into making better lenses because in the past there was a tendency to rest on their laurels. I love supporting them as their Art series is in general absolutely top notch. The petal lens hod allows the hood to extend a little further and controlling flare when shooting towards the light source without causing vignetting as the source is usually above the lens rather than on the side.
Sigma Is becoming this eras zeiss. No longer are they consider cheap 3rd party, rather they are giant killers with amazing prices
I guess I completely missed the time zeiss was considered anything but one the best and more expensive. So what I'm saying is I don't see how your statement makes any sense.
@@paulgood2218he’s saying sigma is like Zeiss, where it is considered one of the best in todays time. What’s hard to understand about that? Lol
@@paulgood2218 the similarity is that zeiss use to be technically a 3rd party but was held to such a high regard as a first party manufacturer. Sigma is becoming that. Many are choosing sigma over first party sony glass or panasonic glass
@@baraaamir7891 zeiss was never the budget option . Zeiss is still this generation Zeiss , voightlander is another hi end 3rd party manufacturer. Sigma is still now as it was then the budget 3rd party option . Zeiss was better than a lot of the 1st party lens. And cost more. Sigma is almost as good and sometimes as good and cost less .
@@ambition2959 in other words Zeiss was never a killer price option
If Sony could please release 35mm and 85mm f1.2 lenses, that would be great!
F1.2 is only 1/3 or 1/2 stop brighter than F1.4, but also more bulky and expensive. It's subjective if worth the heft and hefty price.
How many will switch systems if Sony can't make 85mm f1.2?
Viltrox are making them, they going to annouce it soon.
Is it just as sharp as the Gold Master?
@@adamadamis I want the 1.2 for the bokeh, not for the brightness.
Aperture blades don't matter wide open, the difference is noticed when stopped down a little.
By the way, the song you played at the end of the video is Total Eclipse of the Heart. Good timing.
Thanks @jared Polin, was looking for some decent comparison for the a7600 and the lenses sets that are available. This helped a bit :) the sigma kits and Sony sets that are offered in the shop near by.
Already own the Sony 50 1.2 Gm..its awesome. By far my best lens.
Sigma is becoming my go to brand . Across their range they give 98% performance of the native glass (in some cases equal) for 50-75% of the price.
Was waiting for this review. Got a chance to use the Sigma this weekend. I love the G Master but this Sigma is AMAZING and these photos reflect that
Hi Jared, I am impressed with this Sigma lens. Cheers 😊
Hi Jared. Greetings from the netherlands.... Please, please compare the Sigma 50 f 1.4 and the 50 f 1.2. (great video. Again.)
not much to compare. Mostly going to be different sizes and weight with different widest apertures.
@@froknowsphoto Recently I bought the 1.4 version and I'm very happy with it. A few weeks ago the 1.2 showed up on the market, so I was wondering which is the 'best'. But probably you are right, saving me about 600 US $ 😎😎
@@diederikmittendorp4875I did the same thing. Ughh
@@froknowsphoto What camera do you use here for this test photos..?? Thanks
I would get one for L mount if I hadn't just got the 50 f1.4. Now just waiting for the 85mm F1.2.
How much more if Sigma have a Z mount Lenses for 35 50 and 85 all in 1.4
Any chance they will make it for Nikon?
I am almost certain the reason the Sony appears to be a longer focal length (at around 7:30 and onward) is due to focus breathing. It's the same reason why many superzooms don't look like their "true" focal lengths compared to prime lenses at close to minimum focusing distance and longer focal lengths.
It’s probably because he had breathing comp turned on. It crops in a bit. Can only do it with native lenses, so the sigma (which has notably better focus breathing in general) is not being compensated
Honestly, the photos look better before your over saturated and contrasted presets....
Yes exactly.. i was thinking same
Well I'll stick with the Sony Zeiss 1.8/55 :) a) I'm not a pro, b) 186g :)
Just bought the Sony 1.2 after weighing up the two lens, although I don't have a camera capable of the higher shoot speed at the moment I thought I might in the future, so a bit of future proofing plus other reviews have mentioned the extra snappiness in focusing of the Sony version, I was lucky enough to get it real cheap too, £1249 through an outlet in the UK!.
Nikon User: After shooting the Nikon 35 1.8, 35 Tamron 1.4 with adapter, and owning all the 1.2's I can say theres a larger difference between 1.8 to 1.4 than 1.4 to 1.2...idk...it just seems so. You are very right Jared! I did a styled shoot today and shot the whole thing on a 50 1.2...something special about it!
Indeed the difference of 1 stop is noticeable, but not if it's only 1/3 stop.
I dont know if you read this. Maybe its helpful for your Next Videos. You were confused because the Sony Photo was Little Bit closer and you were wondering if it is maybe a 48mm. It is because the Lens is a Little Bit shorter, Like you mentioned before. Thats the Small difference you wondering about.
I'll go with the sigma and save the extra cash especially since i own the slow rv. I also like the build of the sigma lenses.
Hey! just got an RV. What do you mean slow? as in, it can only shoot 11fps? I ask this because maybe I can save my money and just not get the GM lenses haha.
@@darioaguilarrayon7658similair decision on my side. jumped from A to E mount and got an RIV. Now it stands between the Sigma 1.2 or the Sony GM. Shops actually dont have it in the inventory yet, said that inshop prices could be a bit under 1500€ but i could also get the sony used with warranty.
L-mount alliance alliance alliance alliance alliance alliance alliance alliance alliance alliance alliance alliance alliance alliance alliance alliance shooters can also choose the s-pro 50mm 1.4 witch is a fantastic lens!
Finally, Fro! 👍
I can't go with either, because for whatever reason I bought Canan RF. I can't get 3rd party lenses... I should have bought a Sony camera. 😞
Me too
That’s what I want to go with Sony 3rd party lenses are great for Sony E mount. What about Nikon they don’t even have a native 50mm 1.4 s for the z mount that really sucks
I wanted the sigma 1.4. Can anyone tell me the EXACT difference between 1.2 and 1.4 cause to me personally its indistinguishable at a $550 difference
The bokeh blur is stronger, and you get that extra "oomph" for night photography. If you're not sure, then you'd probably be fine with the 1.4. People doing concerts, portraits, and weddings would be going for the 1.2 over the 1.4 generally.
You should rename Skittles "The Ken Rockwell Effect."
How is it possible Sirui is making 1.2 lenses and charging less than $400?
The race for 85 1.2 e-mount - who wins?
The idea of this lens almost made me switch systems because of the cost. Been waiting for your review, excited to watch it
The cost of switching system will be far greater than the difference of the lower price of this lens. Wanting to switch just because of the price of one lens, is ridiculous.
@@caleidoowdym? If you’re selling your canon gear or whatever it is you’ll get about the same price for used Sony gear. Shoot if you’re coming from Leica then you’ll be getting money back for switching lol
@@ambition2959Good point. Also, leaving Canon for Sony means many more options for lenses, including cheaper third party ones, instead of pricey RF ones. And you may alsi get the Tamron 35 -150 F2 - 2.8 too!
@@ambition2959 If brand A has a lens that is €500 cheaper than the one your current brand is offering and you decide to sell all your current gear (bodies, lenses, accessories, ...) and you buy all the same stuff again new from brand A, including the lens that is a bit cheaper, you will have lost way more than €500, way more than the price difference with buying the lens new from your current brand. Math can't be more obvious than this.
Set looks good, fellas.
If I buy the Sigma today I will spend $150 less than what I have paid for my Sony 50mm f/1.2 after 15% Black Friday discount + 200 euro from 2 cumulating rebates from Sony. So yes, the Sigma is less expensive but if you buy the Sony at the right time you could have a massive discount. I'm from Europe btw.
focal length is a measurement of the optical center of a lens NOT its FOV Jared come on you know this, and because of this you will often see differences from moderate to major in FOV of the exact same focal length - In Cinema Glass this is more common of an occurrence.
That Sigma 1.4 looks interesting
If sigma can get their 35 1.2 to a similar weight, I'm buying it as soon as it drops.
That’s a one great video. What about autofocus in video?
it will be plenty good.
Sigma: 740g
Sony: 778g
Canon: 950g
Nikon: 1090g
Nikon seems to have taken over from Sigma in the oversized glass department.
Sigma’s old DSLR glass and their initial mirrorless offerings (where they took DSLR lenses and slapped adapters on them) definitely qualified for the oversized distinction, but I really appreciate that decreased size and weight seems to be one of their main priorities with all their new mirrorless releases. Even though mirrorless doesn’t really need to compete against DSLR for size nowadays, I appreciate that manufacturers are still trying to make things even more compact.
Ngl, I like portable lenses on Sony specially for travel.
sigma 1,4 but >>>>>>sony 1,2>>>>>>> and Nikon.........1,4 with 1100graaaaaams!
@@rawcamiel These are all 50/1.2 lenses.
I won't professionals, but I will leave the 35mm and 50mm for later date. I will be shooting most of my portrait with Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 MK1 and 70-200mm f2.8 GMII. Acceptable, no complain from people, some ppl do not like the f1.2 bokehness in their photos :). In the future, I will wait for the price of the Sony 50mm f1.2 to drop.
Looks like a great lens!
Can you please put more effort into the L Mount Alliance bit. You are getting a bit slack on it.
Great review. But it seems you're getting a bit..tired...of the L Mount Alliance Echo Chamber- it seemed...forced. That bit needs new energy- it's a moment I look forward to in every lens review, so double dow on the excitement of hearing your celebratory echo!
I love FroPack4 it’s 🔥
Me ha gustado la foto de tu papá junto a su auto Tata
No body needs more than 20fps, anymore is way way way to many photos to try to pick one and edit
8% tax. You Americans are blessed. We pay 21% !
Never liked Sigma colors, too bad because their lenses are very sharp and not expensive.
The HOOD. That is why I want the Sony GM. Ok I have heard so many good things that the Sony 50mm f1.2 was THEE reason I switched from Canon to Sony. Just have not been able to buy the sony 50 f1.2 yet.
People seem to be weird about hoods. I always see people replacing the non-petal hoods with petal ones.
Time to kill the “L mount alliance” thing Jared…it got old!
I’m first to comment and like !🎉 being a Nikon user watching and hoping sigma wins 😂
3:00 is a big deal for me. my 50 art N fall down and break the hood.
Hey fro
Is this a video about Auto focus? again
@froknowsphoto What camera do you use here for this test photos.??
Most of these lenses are plastic, only time will tell if they will last 100 years like the old Nikon lenses. I believe plastic will degrade over time.
I think Sigma once again is hard, bluish and appears oversharp and uneasy.
Sigma is not for me. Hard to look at.
Doesn’t look that good to me
Sofa😊
She is cute. You, not so much. But that's OK.
Art lenses are some of the best lenses on the market topping even some native lenses.
And unfortunately this Sigma 50mm 1.2 is not a true 50mm. Maybe this is how they manage it to make it smaller than the rest.
not a true 50mm ? so what it's a 35 ???
49/51 who cares
@@alainalain6454 49!! It’s more like 46, I know it’s not a big deal and only shows when compared to a 50mm.
But still I would rather have a 50mm than a 46mm.
@@gromenteal2133 How do you know that it's not a 48mm and the sony a 52mm?
@@TheTigers00001 Matt compared between Tamron Sony and Nikon, his finding was Nikon being the longest then Sony then Tamron. So I doubt very much Sony to be 52mm.. Tamron was definitely the shortest and definitely not 50mm, and it’s more noticeable when shooting closer.
Yes no one is going to notice in the field, but still something to mention. With that said I would still buy this Tamron over the Nikon just for the size. I hope Tamron make a 50mm 1.2 for Nikon z mount.
Are you a Sigma male or a Soyny warrior? 😂