I own both. The Sigma rendering is out of this world. Very noticeable against foilage and. highlight points where the Sony looks very rough, and the Sigma so smooth.
Perhaps, but stoping down just a 1/3 stop, usually doesn’t improve sharpness all that much other than just gaining more of the image in focus; & if you’re going to be shooting at 1.4, the GM does makes a lot more sense, half the weight and half the size, & that’s coming from someone who’s not afraid of a big lens, I have the sony g 200-600 & I wouldn’t mind if it lost half its weight lol 🤙🏽
I will keep my Sigma even though I usually like lighter lenses. But I love the images from the Sigma and in Sweden the price difference is huge. I got the Sigma for 66% of the price of the Sony.
That is big difference! We have it all different in Europe with those prices! In Poland we see like 20% drop in retail price after 3-4 months after lens release!
Thanks for this review. Sample photos tell me, I should keep my Sigma. I still feel the Sigma produces a more special look since it is not so perfectly corrected like the Sony. Thou both lenses produce really amazing pictures, judging your taken photos.
Since I have large hands and use a batter grip on my a7iv i dont mind the size and weight of the 1.2. Maybe when I’m older ill regret it but for now I love the Sigma 35 1.2
I am missing a decent 35mm lens. I own Sony 50/1.2 GM and I recently bought Sigma 85/1.4 DG DN(this lens really surprised me). I am beginning to really like Sigma and I think I shall go for Sigma 35/1.2 DG DN even thought it is very heavy.
I have the sigma for about a year and recently have the chance to play with the Sony 35GM, I like the bokeh from the sigma better so stick with the sigma, sharpness is not a differentiator but the bokeh is. So I put up with the size and weight and went with the sigma. For.landscape, neither can compete with the voigtlander 35 F2 so that's what I use for landscape. So the sigma 35 1.2 + voigtlader 35 f2 APO combo works better for me than a single 35GM.
Thinking of this new sony lens specially for wedding receptions where it is very dark. I do also own a canon 85 1.4 with the sigma adapter and two a7III cameras, so it will be one lens on each. I do have also the Sony 24-70 2.8 GM lens
I do like some of the Sigma fotos more (less distracting background) and some of the Sonys... In some cases (and it might just be me), the sharpness creates more "pop" than the Sigma one - despite being the slower lens. I own the Sigma and I tend to sell it for the Sony... hard decision. Like always :) Thanks for the great video.
For me is really easy decision after seeing bokeh from the Sigma and Sony, Sigma all the way for me so I will put up with the size and weight. Easy decision.
It's sad there are some crazy optics out there but real life application because of weight etc makes it so hard to use on a job where you are running around all day filming.
This is a super legit review! OK, I guess I don't want to pay $100 more for the Sigma f/1.2 ... but now they just dropped the price to $799 for the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ... and everybody was saying what an amazing lens that was two years ago.
Hey! If you shoot mirrorless, I’d say to try and stick to lenses that where designed for mirrorless cameras, the current sigma 35 1.4 for Sony, is an older DSLR lens design, with a bolted on mount adapter. If you can wait it out, sigma will release an updated mirrorless “DG DN” version of the 35 1.4, and it will be smaller and lighter than the current model. But if price is an object, I doubt the new version will be able to compete with the dropped price of the older lens 🤙🏽
@@Kaisolostudio I dunno... People were still in love with the Sigma 35/1.4 Art lens two years ago. It’s obviously got an extended body for the mirrorless mounts, but it doesn’t look like a frankenstein lens. I just got a factory refurb for $675. I’m only using it for video, and it’s always on a tripod, so I just can’t justify paying more than double for the Sony version. But I probably would’ve paid for the Sigma f/1.2 until I saw this video. 🙂
Hello ! Excellent review! I am torn because I have the opertunity to get a used sigma for $1180 or wait for my order of the 35 gm ! I shoot portraits and weddings and would love your opinion on if you think I should wait for the GM !!??
Thanks dude! So I think: - if you care about size/weight and prefer lighter lens - go GM - if you care about super sharpness and best IQ you can get - go GM - if you don’t care about size, but prefer that dreamy blur - go Sigma - if you don’t care about size and just want good 35 - get Sigma and save those few hundred bucks :) Hope that helps!
It just breath. You can see the same effect from 24GM at 1:08. But also - I had responsiveness and focus track speed all set to high. I recently changed it to slow, so it doesn't quickly change focus when I move hand in front of myself. Hope that helps!
Hello, I admire your work, I have the SONY GM 35MM 1.4 and I love shooting in 35mm, so I'm thinking of getting another one, which 35mm would you recommend? the Sony 35mm 1.8 or the Sigma 35mm 1.4 dn dg what would you do? Thanks Greetings from miami
Hey Seth! Thanks for the comment. I mentioned this in the video - there was no lens correction applied. Also - 35GM doesn’t have its profiles yet in Lightroom, so I couldn’t show comparison with correction. Feel free to download the samples and check how does it apply for Sigma though - it does help a bit. Cheers!
AND..: HAD HE applied in-camera lens-distortion-correction, then he could have stepped back the little off in order to have that little of the hat that's missing to him (Myself I like the fact that the DN f1.2 is rather a 37 than a 35 - but that is not the subject, nor the cause). No matter if he shoots RAW "anyway" or not. (I for instance like to preview (photograph) often(!) switching color renditions (sepia, BW, sunset, strong, natural etc -intended for JPEG that I dont shoot- assigned to the weal all the time). It is strange that "turning off in camera distortion control is mentioned as a sign of ..honesty, I guess. But it's more subtle than that. Many in-camera-corrections are applied by sony-bodies (perhaps others too) that we no control over and do not even know about. It only comes to light lately through some reviewers somewhat more....
That is actually a good catch! You got me curious, so I went back to those clips and tried to match them and slowed down. It seems like they're on par with the AF speed, but because of that angle shift it feels like Sony is slower. Check it out: www.dropbox.com/sh/tuin8ydppb23vh5/AACcDPVn1RnWLkW2wpCnp6TMa?dl=0 You can playback frame by frame :)
@@MagicWeddingPhotographer hey thanks for doing that! I did some searching as well and found this on dpreview: "Autofocus on the FE Sony 35mm F1.4 GM is pretty quick, if not lightning fast. At around 0.8 seconds to rack from close-focus to infinity, it's plenty speedy for just about anything you might be photographing with a 35mm lens. Somewhat surprisingly, though, the older Zeiss 35mm F1.4 beats it out at around 0.7 seconds for the same focus rack; the much larger Sigma, with more glass to move around, is even faster at around 0.65 seconds. The difference between the Sigma and the Sony GM is pretty stark if you use them back-to-back" So it looks like the Sigma is actually a faster focusing lens, which puzzles me, being so much bigger and with the GM having the linear drive
I had a Sony/Zeiss 35 1.4, and it is not even in the same league as the Sigma 35 1.2, we'll only lighter and smaller. sigma wins in every category. Totally different class lens.
The sigma is clearly the one with smoother bokeh and gives a more 3d pop illusion compared to the Sony. Sure the Sony is sharper but the sigma is still VERY sharp, faster with better bokeh and really 35mm not shorter like the Sony so it still the king of 35mm lenses unless the size is a problem of course
I also get the feeling. The GM has a real hype right now. Mostly tested by Sony Artisans. So we will have to wait until more people share their opinions. I've ordered this GM to try out for myself. But I feel, I cannot let go my lovely Sigma.
Definitely Sigma has that magic of 1.2 aperture to it. I guess decision comes down to a) wether you care about size/weight b) wether you want super corrected and extremely sharp lens vs one with more smoother and more swirly bokeh
.Exactly what I feel after shooting with both so I decide to keep the Sigma. I am no Sony ambassador so I have no brand loyalty, i use my own money to buy the lens I like and in this case the Sigma it's a clear winner for me.
BAD INFORMATION implied. Turning on the in-camera lens distortion correction is not to be understood as inherently bad. Even if You only use RAW files ( BTW will You remember turning it on when You'r doing Video? Ok.. if You are a video specialist.. witch I'm not). If he had switched in camera lens distortion correction on, he would not have had that "surprise" of having to choose between all the hat or no distortion. (To my liking) the DN f1.2 35mm, BTW, is indeed more à 37mm than 35, but perhaps not because of that. Anyway I do turn in camera lens distortion correction on only since I switched from the GM 85 to the DN 85 because I could not even stand the view of its distortion in the viewfinder :-) ! But despite the needed correction in post, it does renders (uphold) so much better to my liking than the GM. Also, lets stop assume Sony does not apply hidden electronic lens corrections that we don't even know of (but evidence of that seem to emerge - from what other reviewers start to find out) -that we cant switch off ! BTW i have assigned to the thumb-weal the color profiles that I constantly change despite shooting only RAW. If a reviewer constantly minimizes difference that are "so minor" - this way, to me it implies underlying that he means "despite being better I prefer the worse one" lol. I do think the GM is a master-piece. (as the gm 135 -I dont have use for). And this Sigma is also a masterpiece for the built and mood. (But indeed soo heavy, like the Art 105mm), and smaller than f 4, 5,6, they are probably equal micro-sharp. The Sigma is probably not recommendable for open apertures for details. For that I close the DN f1.2 to f 4, 5.6 anyway. (!) For portraits I prefer the DN. If You do not feel people deserve that You carry that weight, ... ;-) If I did not need the high apertures I'd go with the Sigma 35mm f2 DG DN. But the GM is objectivally definitely superb, no denying. I would have liked to like this review..
Wait whaaaaat. First of all - what is the bad information here? My lens correction for distortion in camera was set to off. If I had to turn it on I still would cut the hat... it would just squarer the image, but software cannot add information to the image that lens didn’t catch. Regarding the overall image look it’s totally subjective - one will like Sigma better and another one would prefer GM. And also - I’m not a reviewer, I’m a photographer :) I just take photos and happened to have these two lenses, so decide to share as it was commonly ask in the community. I’m happy for you that you prefer Sigma. It’s a great lens, just too big for me. Cheers
Under a different condition of f1.2 vs 1.4, 1.4lens looks sharper. If Sigma turns f 5 and Sony still f 1.4, you will see Sigma much ultra sharper than f 1.4 Sony. Both lenses are exact same prices or sigma is 40-50 bucks higher, that means Sigma had got all of tests over Sony 1.4GM and proved their lens is superior to Sony 1.4 GM.
Can someone please explain... With the Sigma 35 1.2 can you get smooth focus transitions when pulling focus manually at all or does it always focus in steps?
have you tried shooting both at 1.4 to see a fair comparison of the sharpness
You could have a great channel brewing here, I'm impressed.
Thanks so much my friend!
Excellent comparison and very entertaining. I considered getting the Sigma before the GM came out. Now it’s a no-brainer! Definitely saving up for it.
Gracias Señor!! :) You'll love that GM beast!
First lens reviewer I've seen who actually posts NICE sample images rather than pictures of their cat... Well done :)
I own both. The Sigma rendering is out of this world. Very noticeable against foilage and. highlight points where the Sony looks very rough, and the Sigma so smooth.
GM any day. Sharper. Love the colour. Sigma is a big lump to lug around for a fraction of a stop.
Omg my son is going to love that intro 😂
Hahaha, that’s my future target audience 😂
Well, I imagine that sharpness advantage reduces a lot if you stop down the 1.2 to 1.4.
Perhaps, but stoping down just a 1/3 stop, usually doesn’t improve sharpness all that much other than just gaining more of the image in focus; & if you’re going to be shooting at 1.4, the GM does makes a lot more sense, half the weight and half the size, & that’s coming from someone who’s not afraid of a big lens, I have the sony g 200-600 & I wouldn’t mind if it lost half its weight lol 🤙🏽
I will keep my Sigma even though I usually like lighter lenses. But I love the images from the Sigma and in Sweden the price difference is huge. I got the Sigma for 66% of the price of the Sony.
That is big difference! We have it all different in Europe with those prices! In Poland we see like 20% drop in retail price after 3-4 months after lens release!
what is the price of the sigma where you are?
The GM35 is amazing, can't wait to get it already..
You're gonna have fun with it! :)
get sigma 35 f1.4, sharper and cheaper! I got Sigma 35 f1.2 used though
@@user-jr9vw5cx3g Nonsense. The GM is superior by all means.
Thanks for this review. Sample photos tell me, I should keep my Sigma. I still feel the Sigma produces a more special look since it is not so perfectly corrected like the Sony. Thou both lenses produce really amazing pictures, judging your taken photos.
Yeah, if you already have Sigma 1.2 there’s no point to switch to Sony’s, unless you want a smaller lens.
Since I have large hands and use a batter grip on my a7iv i dont mind the size and weight of the 1.2. Maybe when I’m older ill regret it but for now I love the Sigma 35 1.2
I am missing a decent 35mm lens.
I own Sony 50/1.2 GM and I recently bought Sigma 85/1.4 DG DN(this lens really surprised me).
I am beginning to really like Sigma and I think I shall go for Sigma 35/1.2 DG DN even thought it is very heavy.
And now you can sell Sony 50/1.2 GM and get better Sigma 50mm f1.2 DG DN
I have the sigma for about a year and recently have the chance to play with the Sony 35GM, I like the bokeh from the sigma better so stick with the sigma, sharpness is not a differentiator but the bokeh is. So I put up with the size and weight and went with the sigma. For.landscape, neither can compete with the voigtlander 35 F2 so that's what I use for landscape. So the sigma 35 1.2 + voigtlader 35 f2 APO combo works better for me than a single 35GM.
What is the advantage of this voightlander?
Great video as always! Loving the channel :)
Thank so much Tom! Appreciate your comment!
I'm going to buy both!
Good for you 😂🥂
Very informative and helpful!
Thinking of this new sony lens specially for wedding receptions where it is very dark. I do also own a canon 85 1.4 with the sigma adapter and two a7III cameras, so it will be one lens on each. I do have also the Sony 24-70 2.8 GM lens
Yup! 35/1.4 it’s a must have for weddings for me! You will love it 👊🏻
@@MagicWeddingPhotographer thanks so much!
I do like some of the Sigma fotos more (less distracting background) and some of the Sonys... In some cases (and it might just be me), the sharpness creates more "pop" than the Sigma one - despite being the slower lens.
I own the Sigma and I tend to sell it for the Sony... hard decision. Like always :)
Thanks for the great video.
Haha thanks for input! Both lenses are great and have their pros and cons, so either one you’re gonna end up will make you happy! Cheers!
For me is really easy decision after seeing bokeh from the Sigma and Sony, Sigma all the way for me so I will put up with the size and weight. Easy decision.
It's sad there are some crazy optics out there but real life application because of weight etc makes it so hard to use on a job where you are running around all day filming.
This is a super legit review! OK, I guess I don't want to pay $100 more for the Sigma f/1.2 ... but now they just dropped the price to $799 for the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ... and everybody was saying what an amazing lens that was two years ago.
Hey! If you shoot mirrorless, I’d say to try and stick to lenses that where designed for mirrorless cameras, the current sigma 35 1.4 for Sony, is an older DSLR lens design, with a bolted on mount adapter. If you can wait it out, sigma will release an updated mirrorless “DG DN” version of the 35 1.4, and it will be smaller and lighter than the current model. But if price is an object, I doubt the new version will be able to compete with the dropped price of the older lens 🤙🏽
@@Kaisolostudio I dunno... People were still in love with the Sigma 35/1.4 Art lens two years ago. It’s obviously got an extended body for the mirrorless mounts, but it doesn’t look like a frankenstein lens. I just got a factory refurb for $675. I’m only using it for video, and it’s always on a tripod, so I just can’t justify paying more than double for the Sony version. But I probably would’ve paid for the Sigma f/1.2 until I saw this video. 🙂
@@RaquelFoster Cool! Awesome to hear :)
great comparison
Thanks so much!
Love your videos! Curious as to which lens you use for your vlogs/youtube channel?
You had me at the intro 🥰
Hello ! Excellent review!
I am torn because I have the opertunity to get a used sigma for $1180 or wait for my order of the 35 gm ! I shoot portraits and weddings and would love your opinion on if you think I should wait for the GM !!??
Thanks dude!
So I think:
- if you care about size/weight and prefer lighter lens - go GM
- if you care about super sharpness and best IQ you can get - go GM
- if you don’t care about size, but prefer that dreamy blur - go Sigma
- if you don’t care about size and just want good 35 - get Sigma and save those few hundred bucks :)
Hope that helps!
If you were going to use the Sony to film does it hunt for focus or does it just breath a bit when you're touch the screen to change subjects?
It just breath. You can see the same effect from 24GM at 1:08. But also - I had responsiveness and focus track speed all set to high. I recently changed it to slow, so it doesn't quickly change focus when I move hand in front of myself. Hope that helps!
Hello, I admire your work, I have the SONY GM 35MM 1.4 and I love shooting in 35mm, so I'm thinking of getting another one, which 35mm would you recommend? the Sony 35mm 1.8 or the Sigma 35mm 1.4 dn dg what would you do?
Thanks
Greetings from miami
Newly subbed. Amazing review!
This channel has a lot of potential. Keep it going! 👍🏼 💪🏼
🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻
the EXACT review I was after! great stuff
Thanks so much, glad I could help!
thanks for the comparison, great job. question, are the images corrected for distortion?
Hey Seth! Thanks for the comment. I mentioned this in the video - there was no lens correction applied. Also - 35GM doesn’t have its profiles yet in Lightroom, so I couldn’t show comparison with correction. Feel free to download the samples and check how does it apply for Sigma though - it does help a bit. Cheers!
@@MagicWeddingPhotographer Thanks, I see you did mention it sorry I missed that. love the samples to compare
AND..: HAD HE applied in-camera lens-distortion-correction, then he could have stepped back the little off in order to have that little of the hat that's missing to him (Myself I like the fact that the DN f1.2 is rather a 37 than a 35 - but that is not the subject, nor the cause). No matter if he shoots RAW "anyway" or not. (I for instance like to preview (photograph) often(!) switching color renditions (sepia, BW, sunset, strong, natural etc -intended for JPEG that I dont shoot- assigned to the weal all the time).
It is strange that "turning off in camera distortion control is mentioned as a sign of ..honesty, I guess. But it's more subtle than that. Many in-camera-corrections are applied by sony-bodies (perhaps others too) that we no control over and do not even know about. It only comes to light lately through some reviewers somewhat more....
9:50 - is the Sigma AF really that much faster than the GM? In your focus breathing examples the Sigma looked about twice as fast
That is actually a good catch! You got me curious, so I went back to those clips and tried to match them and slowed down. It seems like they're on par with the AF speed, but because of that angle shift it feels like Sony is slower. Check it out: www.dropbox.com/sh/tuin8ydppb23vh5/AACcDPVn1RnWLkW2wpCnp6TMa?dl=0 You can playback frame by frame :)
@@MagicWeddingPhotographer hey thanks for doing that! I did some searching as well and found this on dpreview:
"Autofocus on the FE Sony 35mm F1.4 GM is pretty quick, if not lightning fast. At around 0.8 seconds to rack from close-focus to infinity, it's plenty speedy for just about anything you might be photographing with a 35mm lens.
Somewhat surprisingly, though, the older Zeiss 35mm F1.4 beats it out at around 0.7 seconds for the same focus rack; the much larger Sigma, with more glass to move around, is even faster at around 0.65 seconds. The difference between the Sigma and the Sony GM is pretty stark if you use them back-to-back"
So it looks like the Sigma is actually a faster focusing lens, which puzzles me, being so much bigger and with the GM having the linear drive
Great video!
Thanks Kathy!
Great Video! How did you become a Sony ambassador?
Hey! Thanks. It's been over 3 years since I'm Ambassador, the local Sony reached out to me few years ago and basically that is how it started.
Great video, but the font on your title card is not legible.
Good comparison.
Thanks Terence! Glad you liked it!
You should get the Sigma 35 1.2, because I'm selling mine😏
Haha getting that GM beauty?
@@MagicWeddingPhotographer yeah. I will miss the Sigma, but I shoot weddings, and need something lighter for all day shooting.
Im with you on this!
I sold my sigma 1.2 and feel in love with the Sony 1.8 lol
@@jimmi8928 your wrists will thank you for that 😅
Nice comparison. Thank you!
As i understand, you tried Zeiss 35/1.4 also. Is it that worse as many people say
I had a Sony/Zeiss 35 1.4, and it is not even in the same league as the Sigma 35 1.2, we'll only lighter and smaller. sigma wins in every category. Totally different class lens.
@@dannyli9424 Thank you for opinion!
which mic are you using while talking ?
Hey! So I actually burnt 2 rode microphones and now got this cheap Boya mic: amzn.to/3rkbFur
So surprised that you didn't stop down the sigma just to bring them at same level and compare a few things like sharpness
The sigma is clearly the one with smoother bokeh and gives a more 3d pop illusion compared to the Sony. Sure the Sony is sharper but the sigma is still VERY sharp, faster with better bokeh and really 35mm not shorter like the Sony so it still the king of 35mm lenses unless the size is a problem of course
I also get the feeling. The GM has a real hype right now. Mostly tested by Sony Artisans. So we will have to wait until more people share their opinions. I've ordered this GM to try out for myself. But I feel, I cannot let go my lovely Sigma.
Definitely Sigma has that magic of 1.2 aperture to it. I guess decision comes down to a) wether you care about size/weight b) wether you want super corrected and extremely sharp lens vs one with more smoother and more swirly bokeh
.Exactly what I feel after shooting with both so I decide to keep the Sigma. I am no Sony ambassador so I have no brand loyalty, i use my own money to buy the lens I like and in this case the Sigma it's a clear winner for me.
Thank you for testing
My pleasure!
Is this 35mm even sharper than the 135mm?
I haven’t done 1:1 with those, but 35 seems sharper from my experience
I will be making toys reviews videos. Is sony GM is good.
support
Thank you!
I don't know from where but you look like eminem little bit 😊✌️
I like the GM but Sigma is still cheaper
This Sigma is actually more expensive...
@@MagicWeddingPhotographer ~500 différence in switzerland
The Sigma is actually $100 usd more than the Sony in USA and I am more than happy to pay that as I like it better after shooting with both of them.
Your channel is going to blow up!! Great review.
Thank you!!
Fantastic review!! I’m jealous of all the legos lol!! 📷🤣😅🙌🏽
Thanks hahah! It's pretty cool, I know! :P
Sigma forever
BAD INFORMATION implied. Turning on the in-camera lens distortion correction is not to be understood as inherently bad. Even if You only use RAW files ( BTW will You remember turning it on when You'r doing Video? Ok.. if You are a video specialist.. witch I'm not).
If he had switched in camera lens distortion correction on, he would not have had that "surprise" of having to choose between all the hat or no distortion.
(To my liking) the DN f1.2 35mm, BTW, is indeed more à 37mm than 35, but perhaps not because of that. Anyway I do turn in camera lens distortion correction on only since I switched from the GM 85 to the DN 85 because I could not even stand the view of its distortion in the viewfinder :-) ! But despite the needed correction in post, it does renders (uphold) so much better to my liking than the GM.
Also, lets stop assume Sony does not apply hidden electronic lens corrections that we don't even know of (but evidence of that seem to emerge - from what other reviewers start to find out) -that we cant switch off !
BTW i have assigned to the thumb-weal the color profiles that I constantly change despite shooting only RAW.
If a reviewer constantly minimizes difference that are "so minor" - this way, to me it implies underlying that he means "despite being better I prefer the worse one" lol.
I do think the GM is a master-piece. (as the gm 135 -I dont have use for). And this Sigma is also a masterpiece for the built and mood. (But indeed soo heavy, like the Art 105mm), and smaller than f 4, 5,6, they are probably equal micro-sharp. The Sigma is probably not recommendable for open apertures for details. For that I close the DN f1.2 to f 4, 5.6 anyway. (!)
For portraits I prefer the DN. If You do not feel people deserve that You carry that weight, ... ;-)
If I did not need the high apertures I'd go with the Sigma 35mm f2 DG DN. But the GM is objectivally definitely superb, no denying. I would have liked to like this review..
Wait whaaaaat. First of all - what is the bad information here? My lens correction for distortion in camera was set to off. If I had to turn it on I still would cut the hat... it would just squarer the image, but software cannot add information to the image that lens didn’t catch.
Regarding the overall image look it’s totally subjective - one will like Sigma better and another one would prefer GM. And also - I’m not a reviewer, I’m a photographer :) I just take photos and happened to have these two lenses, so decide to share as it was commonly ask in the community. I’m happy for you that you prefer Sigma. It’s a great lens, just too big for me. Cheers
Also - thanks for the comment and the insights! Hope you’ll stick around for more videos!
Lol this jargon was a tough read
@@MagicWeddingPhotographer You would still have (willingly) cut the hat if You had lens correction option turned on in camera ?? You make no sens.
They look the same uno..
Under a different condition of f1.2 vs 1.4, 1.4lens looks sharper. If Sigma turns f 5 and Sony still f 1.4, you will see Sigma much ultra sharper than f 1.4 Sony. Both lenses are exact same prices or sigma is 40-50 bucks higher, that means Sigma had got all of tests over Sony 1.4GM and proved their lens is superior to Sony 1.4 GM.
Can someone please explain... With the Sigma 35 1.2 can you get smooth focus transitions when pulling focus manually at all or does it always focus in steps?
How bad is it up there under the hat? lol
SIGMA 35/1.2 shows BIGGER BOKEH SPOT! SIGMA winner! LOL
Kinda bias review.