Love your reviews @Dustin Abbot!!! I purchased this lens yesterday to go in my Sony a7siii grab my bag I go video collection. The rendering of light with this lens and many of the other Sigma i series lenses. Love the oof or bokeh especially light sources . I like the flares and ghosting even the cats eye bokeh. Thanks Dustin for the review
Big fan of the lineup. For my L mount. I have the 17,24,45,50,90 i series lenses. They all offer great consistent quality amongst the line up. Sigma really hit this one out of the park. I wonder why Canon or Nikon refuse to come out with a similar type of lenses. Even my expensive L glass for my Canon feels cheap compared to these and of course huge. Canon lost me for the DSLR to Mirrorless and I chose Lumix instead. These are great "Reportage" glass. (24/50/90) my Trifecta for carry.
This "iSeries" is definitely a nice one. Not everyone will "get" these lenses when looking at the basic specs and price, but they are very premium in real world use...and the price makes much more sense when you hold and use them.
Really struggling to decide which lens to buy, this or the Sony 85mm F1.8 for my Sony A7riii. Ive watched both of your reviews on them and im still stuck. Both seem fantastic, especially for how I will be using them which is primarily car photography. Sigma is smaller, lighter, better build quality imo and I love the aperture ring, closer focusing distance, plus its newer. The sony on the other hand gets to 1.8 which is nice, and autofocus is top notch. Any help on deciding which is the better lens, or at least the better value?
That's a tough decision, to be sure. I think you'll probably be happy with either lens. I see the Sigma's greatest value as being how compact it is, but the Sony gives you great performance and a much larger maximum aperture.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I think after really learning about both I'm going to have to end up going with the Sony for the larger aperture since I love getting down to 1.4 on my Sigma 35mm.
Great review. Would have liked to see some portraits but I understand your time is limited. Any idea when these are out? Was supped to be today but no one has them yet. I saw Oct 15th on one site. I already have the Sigma 85 f/1.4 which is incredibly good but I was considering this for my 2nd body.
Im curious how this stacks up with Sony’s 85mm f1.8. To me thats its biggest competition. That lens is a little cheaper, lets in more light, and seems about the same size (at least in length). Which would you go for having tested both?
That's an interesting question. The Sigma definitely has nicer build, but the Sony (as you say) is great value for money. The lenses aren't the same size, however, as the Sigma is more than 20mm shorter in length, about 80g lighter, and is 14mm narrower in diameter. My decision would probably come down to how important an extremely compact lens is.
Could be interresting to compare with Zeiss Batis 85mm who is stabilized , open 1.8 and just 65g more than this 90mm ? of course Zeiss have mini focus distance at 85cm.
This was my immediate thought. The 85 f/1.8 is ridiculously sharp, and not just “sharp for a $550 lens”. And it’s relatively small…. Maybe not as small as the Sigma, but still handy. Actually, I’m flying out this morning, and I made the snap decision to bring the 85mm f1.8 to complement my 16-55mm f/2.8 with my A6600. Usually my travel kit is the 16-55 and 70-350, but I decided to bring one of my full frame lenses with my on a whim. Really where I think the Sigma is great is the combination of compact size AND build quality AND good image quality. The Sony is… flimsy and not well sealed. The minimum focus distance on the 85mm is hard to work with sometimes too. Like 2.5’ or something like that.
Sony is so hallow. It breaks easily. I had one. Bought the Zeiss after I broke the Sony dropping onto carpet. Then I opened the Sony up snd fixed it awhile. But you see how cheap and plastic and fragile the Sony is. Bought the Zeiss. Super happy. But bought Sigma just a couple days ago for gimbal. It would match my Sony 55mm with same weight and size so I won’t have to rebalance Gimbal plus no focus breathing
I'd love to have a classic super compact 135mm f2.8 prime. Even an f3.5 prime would be fine with me if it could be as small as the Pentax-M 135mm f3.5.
At that price/performance, I’d go with the Sony 85/1.8. Likely better AF, over a stoop wider max aperture, great iq, price that’s not far from this sigma. I know you love these sigma lenses, but i feel there are better alternatives
Rather surprised at the ,relatively, lower number of viewers and resulting more limited feedback? Am showing my ignorance by posing the following question, however do not understand why Sigma are not making the 2.8 range of lens available for very popular Canon, Nikon FF cameras. Would love a 24 2.8 for my Canon 6D.
Sigma are not making Canon RF and Nikon Z mount lenses because unlike Sony, which has embraced 3rd party lens makers, Canon and Nikon dont want them. They want you to spend big money on their lenses. Canon has already chased Samyang off. They recently announced they will no longer be producing or supporting their two RF mount primes. I left Canon after 17 years and switched to Sony primarily because of this. I was tired of waiting around for quality RF lenses that you dont have to mortgage your home to buy. Thats where Sigma and Tamron would have worked out wonderfully, but Canon and Nikon clearly dont want them.
Hi Robert, I'm surprised at the rather tepid response to this lens, too. The development of lenses for mirrorless systems is a completely different path than development for DSLR It's not just a matter of putting multiple lens mounts on a lens, so it is unlikely you will see any of these new lenses on DSLRs.
Thanks for the follow-up Dustin. Just as well I have all the glass I need for my Canon 6D. Fuji have apparently "locked" Sigma out, but have read commentary on Fuji X sites that the excellent Sigma 56 1.4 , I have for my a6400, is available in Fuji X mount.
I shoot leica and I have the 85mm 1.4 DGDN and the 105mm Macro DGDN that said would you buy this? Is it better than those in your opinion? Great work as usual!
I definitely wouldn't say that it is better than those lenses, no. It's main attraction is its very compact size and that it is so competent at that size.
One visualizes very differently with a very compact tele as with a 90mm macro. Also a macro will not only be larger but give much more magnifcation so the texture will be different at the same close distance. Also the size of the object - something very tiny I would not use such a lens for but for a larger object/face/hands it would gve something unique also with video. The fact that they have given 1/3rd of a stop on the aperture dial is in a way what clickless does but with the difference that on clickless or preset one does not know exactly how much one is turning. I also expect compact lenses not to be distortion free - given that software is part of the digita imaging. Its much more how easy it is to develop profiles for them. The fact that they have put in an AF motor too in this tiny lens with also a better MF dial means that they are already thinking of making another kind of videography possible - with very compact equipment. Compare the size of cine lenses. Its very interesting how design & engineering is evolving the digital visual canvas.
@@DustinAbbottTWI They seem to have not aimed it at a general audience. Its a hghly specialized design-optics but not at a leica-zeiss price but with both modern and classical features. It also follows in the tradition of japanese lens design (film era) wherein they would also work with studying various optical cultures from painting textures to Bauhaus - their own cinema. Sigma is a very interesting company - they were able to evolve from making cheap lenses to high quality macros - primes - then make the bridge to the digtal dslr - now mirrorless, cine lenses too & also their own cameras.
Merci pour ce nouveau commentaire très intéressant. Pouvez-vous donner quelques éléments de comparaison avec le Sony 90 macro f2.8 G OSS (qualité optique surtout) , avec lequel il est en concurrence directe, et que vous avez testé il y a un an.
Je pense que la macro Sony est légèrement plus nette, mais pas de beaucoup. Ce sont des objectifs très différents avec des objectifs différents, donc je ne les considère pas vraiment comme des objectifs concurrents autres que la distance focale. Si la taille ne vous dérange pas et que vous voulez un objectif macro, optez pour le 90G. Si vous voulez un objectif très compact, optez pour le Sigma.
I returned my Sigma 90mm. It had serious bokeh issues with straight lines leadings up to the focus point... Showed the camera store and they completely agreed and refunded my money. Anybody else seen this?
Care to elaborate on any of those thoughts? I’m not sure how a lens could be pointless, if they sell enough to make a profit than the point of the lens in the eyes company has been made. As far as overpriced? Sure, I guess, though it depends on your point of view, I’d happily pay this much for a lens of decent build quality.
@@sergtrav well pointless is an argument no one could ever win, because no one can speak to the needs of others. Someone might prefer a 90mm fov to 85, want a shorter mfd, whatever. Price wise, sure, though the build on both of those is very different. Not that they’re not durable, but the build/feature set isn’t at the same level. No different than paying a bit more for real maple syrup with your pancakes. Some people are willing to pay a bit more for a more substantial feeling lens!
@@sergtrav Ive owned both the Sony 85 1.8 and the Samyang 85 1.4 Both are considerably bigger and heaver than this and not as well built. This is a 90mm lens and its incredibly small. It also has a premium build and its made in Japan. The Samyang 85 1.4 is garbage. I know Dustin loves it but every other reviewer mentions its AF issues, with some even going thru 3 copies of the lens. I experienced it first hand and I went thru 3 copies as well. Two Samyang and one Rokinon. Every other shot is out of focus at 1.4 and even when it hits, its still soft. Its also got a nasty yellow tint you need to edit out of all your photos. The bokeh quality is rather nice though, but thats it. Also had the Samyang 35 and 50 f/1.4 with the exact same terrible AF and soft photo issues. Id avoid all things Samyang when it comes to 1.4 lenses. Their cheap little 1.8 lenses are better but built like toys. The Sony 1.8 is as boring as it gets, zero character and sterile photos. It is also terrible shooting any kind of portrait backlit unless you are into major flaring and super low contrast photos. Id take this Sigma all day over the Sony and Samyang 85s if I didnt already own the incredible Sigma 85 f/1.4 DG DN
0:23 for the cameo from Dustin's cat! lol
Yep. He just wouldn't stay away!
Great review, and the cat is very funny.😄
Glad you enjoyed it!
Haha your cat giving taps is adorable.
He's pretty cute.
Love your reviews @Dustin Abbot!!!
I purchased this lens yesterday to go in my Sony a7siii grab my bag I go video collection.
The rendering of light with this lens and many of the other Sigma i series lenses. Love the oof or bokeh especially light sources . I like the flares and ghosting even the cats eye bokeh.
Thanks Dustin for the review
My pleasure. Enjoy your new lens.
Big fan of the lineup. For my L mount. I have the 17,24,45,50,90 i series lenses. They all offer great consistent quality amongst the line up. Sigma really hit this one out of the park. I wonder why Canon or Nikon refuse to come out with a similar type of lenses. Even my expensive L glass for my Canon feels cheap compared to these and of course huge. Canon lost me for the DSLR to Mirrorless and I chose Lumix instead. These are great "Reportage" glass. (24/50/90) my Trifecta for carry.
This "iSeries" is definitely a nice one. Not everyone will "get" these lenses when looking at the basic specs and price, but they are very premium in real world use...and the price makes much more sense when you hold and use them.
Really struggling to decide which lens to buy, this or the Sony 85mm F1.8 for my Sony A7riii. Ive watched both of your reviews on them and im still stuck.
Both seem fantastic, especially for how I will be using them which is primarily car photography.
Sigma is smaller, lighter, better build quality imo and I love the aperture ring, closer focusing distance, plus its newer.
The sony on the other hand gets to 1.8 which is nice, and autofocus is top notch.
Any help on deciding which is the better lens, or at least the better value?
That's a tough decision, to be sure. I think you'll probably be happy with either lens. I see the Sigma's greatest value as being how compact it is, but the Sony gives you great performance and a much larger maximum aperture.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I think after really learning about both I'm going to have to end up going with the Sony for the larger aperture since I love getting down to 1.4 on my Sigma 35mm.
Do you see a case for both?
Great review. Would have liked to see some portraits but I understand your time is limited. Any idea when these are out? Was supped to be today but no one has them yet. I saw Oct 15th on one site. I already have the Sigma 85 f/1.4 which is incredibly good but I was considering this for my 2nd body.
Mid October is what I heard, too.
Im curious how this stacks up with Sony’s 85mm f1.8. To me thats its biggest competition. That lens is a little cheaper, lets in more light, and seems about the same size (at least in length). Which would you go for having tested both?
That's an interesting question. The Sigma definitely has nicer build, but the Sony (as you say) is great value for money. The lenses aren't the same size, however, as the Sigma is more than 20mm shorter in length, about 80g lighter, and is 14mm narrower in diameter. My decision would probably come down to how important an extremely compact lens is.
Could be interresting to compare with Zeiss Batis 85mm who is stabilized , open 1.8 and just 65g more than this 90mm ? of course Zeiss have mini focus distance at 85cm.
This was my immediate thought. The 85 f/1.8 is ridiculously sharp, and not just “sharp for a $550 lens”. And it’s relatively small…. Maybe not as small as the Sigma, but still handy.
Actually, I’m flying out this morning, and I made the snap decision to bring the 85mm f1.8 to complement my 16-55mm f/2.8 with my A6600. Usually my travel kit is the 16-55 and 70-350, but I decided to bring one of my full frame lenses with my on a whim.
Really where I think the Sigma is great is the combination of compact size AND build quality AND good image quality. The Sony is… flimsy and not well sealed. The minimum focus distance on the 85mm is hard to work with sometimes too. Like 2.5’ or something like that.
Sony is so hallow. It breaks easily. I had one. Bought the Zeiss after I broke the Sony dropping onto carpet. Then I opened the Sony up snd fixed it awhile. But you see how cheap and plastic and fragile the Sony is. Bought the Zeiss. Super happy. But bought Sigma just a couple days ago for gimbal. It would match my Sony 55mm with same weight and size so I won’t have to rebalance Gimbal plus no focus breathing
Sigma metal. Aperture ring. More premium
I'd love to have a classic super compact 135mm f2.8 prime. Even an f3.5 prime would be fine with me if it could be as small as the Pentax-M 135mm f3.5.
I agree with that. I've had both the Takumar 135mm F3.5 and F2.5 lenses in the past, and something like that with AF would be nice.
great review, Dustin, thank you. BTW, I noticed that at times you covered the Sony Model logo with the anchor links .... :)
Not intentional. I just wanted them out of the way
At that price/performance, I’d go with the Sony 85/1.8. Likely better AF, over a stoop wider max aperture, great iq, price that’s not far from this sigma. I know you love these sigma lenses, but i feel there are better alternatives
Fair enough, though the Sigma is considerably smaller than the Sony and has the nicer build. Different strokes for different folks...
Focus is fast on this sigma and even focuses closer
Rather surprised at the ,relatively, lower number of viewers and resulting more limited feedback?
Am showing my ignorance by posing the following question, however do not understand why Sigma are not making the 2.8 range of lens available for very popular Canon, Nikon FF cameras.
Would love a 24 2.8 for my Canon 6D.
Sigma are not making Canon RF and Nikon Z mount lenses because unlike Sony, which has embraced 3rd party lens makers, Canon and Nikon dont want them. They want you to spend big money on their lenses. Canon has already chased Samyang off. They recently announced they will no longer be producing or supporting their two RF mount primes. I left Canon after 17 years and switched to Sony primarily because of this. I was tired of waiting around for quality RF lenses that you dont have to mortgage your home to buy. Thats where Sigma and Tamron would have worked out wonderfully, but Canon and Nikon clearly dont want them.
Hi Robert, I'm surprised at the rather tepid response to this lens, too. The development of lenses for mirrorless systems is a completely different path than development for DSLR It's not just a matter of putting multiple lens mounts on a lens, so it is unlikely you will see any of these new lenses on DSLRs.
Thanks for the follow-up Dustin. Just as well I have all the glass I need for my Canon 6D.
Fuji have apparently "locked" Sigma out, but have read commentary on Fuji X sites that the excellent Sigma 56 1.4 , I have for my a6400, is available in Fuji X mount.
Hi Dustin, have you already got your hands on one of this year's new RF lenses (RF 100 macro, 14-35L)?
Unfortunately no. I had them sourced, but Canon has delivered much less stock to Canada than expected. They have had serious supply chain issues.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you for answering! Hope you'll get the chance to test them soon :)
The cat is neat.
He is a beautiful animal
I shoot leica and I have the 85mm 1.4 DGDN and the 105mm Macro DGDN that said would you buy this? Is it better than those in your opinion? Great work as usual!
I definitely wouldn't say that it is better than those lenses, no. It's main attraction is its very compact size and that it is so competent at that size.
Again a grait and interesting Video 👍
Glad you enjoyed it
Would you have any concerns re the Sigma 90mm f/2.8's ability to resolve the 61mp sensor of the Sony A7RivA? Thanks.
Not really. It did okay.
One visualizes very differently with a very compact tele as with a 90mm macro. Also a macro will not only be larger but give much more magnifcation so the texture will be different at the same close distance. Also the size of the object - something very tiny I would not use such a lens for but for a larger object/face/hands it would gve something unique also with video. The fact that they have given 1/3rd of a stop on the aperture dial is in a way what clickless does but with the difference that on clickless or preset one does not know exactly how much one is turning. I also expect compact lenses not to be distortion free - given that software is part of the digita imaging. Its much more how easy it is to develop profiles for them. The fact that they have put in an AF motor too in this tiny lens with also a better MF dial means that they are already thinking of making another kind of videography possible - with very compact equipment. Compare the size of cine lenses. Its very interesting how design & engineering is evolving the digital visual canvas.
For sure. I found this lens interesting, but it doesn't seem like the general audience really "gets" it.
@@DustinAbbottTWI They seem to have not aimed it at a general audience. Its a hghly specialized design-optics but not at a leica-zeiss price but with both modern and classical features. It also follows in the tradition of japanese lens design (film era) wherein they would also work with studying various optical cultures from painting textures to Bauhaus - their own cinema. Sigma is a very interesting company - they were able to evolve from making cheap lenses to high quality macros - primes - then make the bridge to the digtal dslr - now mirrorless, cine lenses too & also their own cameras.
Merci pour ce nouveau commentaire très intéressant. Pouvez-vous donner quelques éléments de comparaison avec le Sony 90 macro f2.8 G OSS (qualité optique surtout) , avec lequel il est en concurrence directe, et que vous avez testé il y a un an.
Je pense que la macro Sony est légèrement plus nette, mais pas de beaucoup. Ce sont des objectifs très différents avec des objectifs différents, donc je ne les considère pas vraiment comme des objectifs concurrents autres que la distance focale. Si la taille ne vous dérange pas et que vous voulez un objectif macro, optez pour le 90G. Si vous voulez un objectif très compact, optez pour le Sigma.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Merci Dustin. C'est toujours très classe de votre part de répondre à toutes les questions qui vous sont posées.
5:02 for an instant I thought it was a snake
Ahhh, the cat tail. I can see that.
I returned my Sigma 90mm. It had serious bokeh issues with straight lines leadings up to the focus point... Showed the camera store and they completely agreed and refunded my money.
Anybody else seen this?
Great review and a very interesting small lens! (Though I still keep my Loxia 85, didn't miss the AF until now) Also the cat made it even better! :D
The Loxia 85mm has lovely rendering and color, so I understand that.
cool
:)
Feels like autofocus Leica
Interesting.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I love the build and aperture control
cat
Pointless overpriced lens.
Hmmm, interesting take. Not mine, but interesting.
Care to elaborate on any of those thoughts? I’m not sure how a lens could be pointless, if they sell enough to make a profit than the point of the lens in the eyes company has been made. As far as overpriced? Sure, I guess, though it depends on your point of view, I’d happily pay this much for a lens of decent build quality.
@@HH60gPaveHawk Maybe it can be pointless and overpriced because of cheaper Sony 85 1,8 and Samyang 85 1,4 for the same price?
@@sergtrav well pointless is an argument no one could ever win, because no one can speak to the needs of others. Someone might prefer a 90mm fov to 85, want a shorter mfd, whatever. Price wise, sure, though the build on both of those is very different. Not that they’re not durable, but the build/feature set isn’t at the same level. No different than paying a bit more for real maple syrup with your pancakes. Some people are willing to pay a bit more for a more substantial feeling lens!
@@sergtrav Ive owned both the Sony 85 1.8 and the Samyang 85 1.4 Both are considerably bigger and heaver than this and not as well built. This is a 90mm lens and its incredibly small. It also has a premium build and its made in Japan. The Samyang 85 1.4 is garbage. I know Dustin loves it but every other reviewer mentions its AF issues, with some even going thru 3 copies of the lens. I experienced it first hand and I went thru 3 copies as well. Two Samyang and one Rokinon. Every other shot is out of focus at 1.4 and even when it hits, its still soft. Its also got a nasty yellow tint you need to edit out of all your photos. The bokeh quality is rather nice though, but thats it. Also had the Samyang 35 and 50 f/1.4 with the exact same terrible AF and soft photo issues. Id avoid all things Samyang when it comes to 1.4 lenses. Their cheap little 1.8 lenses are better but built like toys. The Sony 1.8 is as boring as it gets, zero character and sterile photos. It is also terrible shooting any kind of portrait backlit unless you are into major flaring and super low contrast photos. Id take this Sigma all day over the Sony and Samyang 85s if I didnt already own the incredible Sigma 85 f/1.4 DG DN