this zoom lens almost made me sell my primes
Vložit
- čas přidán 5. 06. 2024
- GET 10% OFF your next Squarespace website: www.squarespace.com/mannyortiz
MY COLOR GRADING PRESETS: www.manuelortizphoto.com/presets
CHECK OUT HOW I RETOUCH MY PORTRAITS: geni.us/Retouchingcourse
THE MANNY ORTIZ BEAUTY DISH: geni.us/Whitebeautydish
GEAR USED IN VIDEO
SIGMA 28-45mm F1.8: bhpho.to/3wTPynr
POV SETUP: GOPRO w/ mod bhpho.to/3wVZPiV
360 CAMERA: bhpho.to/3z12o3y
LIGHTING GEAR I USE
WESTCOTT STROBE: bhpho.to/2SdQRsR
BEAUTY DISH: geni.us/Whitebeautydish
FLASH TRIGGER: bhpho.to/3lI3x4p
LIGHT STAND: bhpho.to/49QGDBm
SANDBAG: bhpho.to/3wSm0pI
WAGON: amzn.to/3wSW1P5
WESTCOTT REFLECTOR: bhpho.to/3TAexVb
HOW I SHOOT MY VIDEOS
MAIN CAMERA: bhpho.to/3EKchCF
MAIN VIDEO LENS: bhpho.to/3TTpBwX
MIC SETUP: bhpho.to/3vjZ0PG - Zábava
Forget the lens the photos were fire! 💥
I am really really looking forward to getting my hands on this lens soon.
Looking forward to testing this out! Loving the 24-70 2.8 Art II
For portraiture, the Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8 does everything I'll ever need... I got no need for primes with that one 💪
I have that lens too. Super good. Just kinda tanky haha.
I think for weddings and other events. The versatility can not be outdone. But if Im doing specifically portrait type of shoots. I think I'd like a couple primes. 35 and 85 like he mentioned just for reduced weight and size, and that extra prime pop look
would you say its professional level quality?
I’ve seen nothing but good things about the Tamron and I think it will be my next purchase.
@themondoshow The sharpness is incredible even wide open and in the corners, and things like CA are controlled very well! GM quality!
The only two downsides I can see on the Tamron is the weight and quite a bit of ghosting when shooting towards the sun/ bright light.
Sounds like a very interesting lens
How do u blur out the background in post as you mentioned in the video?❤
one thing I love about Manny's shots is that his location spotting is super super on point. I'm starting to really see his photo style at least for these outdoor shots, but one thing is that those backgrounds look industrial and clean and his angles are amazing
New York is beautiful to shoot as well, but it's just a lot more messy
(1) Is adding blur in post as pleasing as real optical blur? Close?
(2) How do you like the Tamron 28-70mm f/2.8 G2?
With the latest versions of lightroom and photoshop, the adaptive blur is actually pretty good
i see for portraits shooting but hard for other style bro. i love your videos and keep up good work. also your right i would tell people to test or rent this lens first before you buy. what i tell people rent to test lens first if not sure if it will fit your needs
Can we have one for the RF mount ? @sigma
35-85 would have done it for me. Even if it was an f/2.8. It's getting to the wide-normal on the wide-end and the portrait FL on the long-end, that makes it really useful.
I used to have the 35-150 Tamron in the past, but it was a big/dense lens and I felt it to be unwieldy, and got rid of it. But if it is a choice between that lens and this lens, I would opt for the 35-150.
A 35-85 F1.8 would almost never leave my camera.
i love the golden hour color on here face. Amazing color!
That's a pretty big lens. I'd rather take the Tamron 35 150. It's way more versatile if you're looking for a 1 lense solution
1.8 is not the same like 2-2.8
@@Muellermediagroup 1.8 and 2 are the same.
Sigma should pair this with a 50-90 f1.8 to cover the second half of the portrait focal length.
If one buys the presets twice by mistake you still get to be charged a second time?
I am fine with my 24mm GM 1.4 and with the Sigma DG DN 70-200 E mount...
I had 16-35 f4
35 1.8
50 1.8
90 2.8
70-200 4
now just tamron 35 150 and 24 GM. And I feel like i have everithing I need.
I will change the tamron just for a lighter version, because is so good for every work I do
Question where did you get the bended light stand for the diffuser?
That’s his camera distorting the lines. It’s a regular light stand.
The Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 was a 2x zoom. This 28-45mm f/1.8 is a 1.6x zoom. At some point, we tend to pick which focal length, of 'close' ones, we prefer, such as 28 vs 35 or 35 vs 50mm. If someone really likes the 28 and 50, they often also like lenses which are small and unobtrusive. Basically if someone really cares about specific focal lengths, this doesn't reach enough to be worth it. And if someone mildly cares about specific focal lengths, they probably want the benefits of a 24-70 or 24-120. This lens suits an extremely small portion of photographers.
This is a dope lens. I shoot between 28mm and 50mm. 45 mm is actually the closest to the human eye. I can’t wait to pick it up.
The question is just if you want this or just a 35mm f1.4 & then take a step back or a step forward to get something similar to 28mm & 50mm.
@@TerraThink I’d rather have this.
This would really work in my low light videos cause of the f1.8. But the size is bit too much. Lil too much extra hassle. But good informative video, thanks!
I feel could walk out with just one lens with the Canon RF 28-70 F2 I use it all the time but still love to grab my RF primes 35 50 85 135 but definitely great when you need to run and gun
A flawless 24-50 would always be my choice. There's a huge difference between a boring 28mm and a dynamic 24mm. That lens flaring in direct sunlight is definitely a bummer, but it might just be a Sigma thing-it's always been like that. I remember having a Sigma 15-30 back in the day... shooting with a light source in the frame always gave you some very unpleasant flare.
How do you have your 360 cam mounted?
He uses a Go-Pro. There’s a whole bracket setup that Anthony Gugliotta details on his channel
You could pair it with the Tamron 35-150mm f2-2.8 too. I know there is some overlap but you're getting that f1.8
They used to have two versions of that lens. My guess is that they will come out with a portraiture length version.
Mannys video drops, immediately click play 🎉
I think if Sigma made a 35-85 1.8/2.0 would be DOPE! I don't need internal zoom.
It will weight 2kg
@@hikari_ray 🤣🤣🤣
@@hikari_ray who cares … it’s not for you
That would be so sick
@@hikari_raythat’s not true. A Sony 300/2.8 only weights 1.742 kilograms.
I would suggest looking at the Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 before looking at buying this lens. 28-45 is almost no change in focal length. If bokeh is the goal, you'll get more from a tighter lens at a higher aperture. Now what this lens does excite me for is the possibility for a 50-100mm replacement. The 18-35 + 50-100 was an amazing combo on super 35 sensors (video). If they made a FF version of the 18-35 I suspect at 50-100mm replacement is not far off. It'd be somewhere in the 75-150 range would be my guess.
hey i just have a quick question, why is a 28-45 considered almost no change in focal length but the 18-35 is considered great despite also having exactly the same 17mm in change in focal length?
In reality, there was a full-frame version of the 18-35. I'm talking about the Sigma 24-35mm F2 Art. It used a similar optical design, though with a more limited focal range since the full-frame sensor is larger. Fun fact: if you mount the 18-35 on a full-frame camera, you can comfortably use the lens from about 24mm onwards without any vignetting :)
I believe there's a 24-70 f/2 Sony on the way. Same size as the Canon 28-70 f/2. If/when that arrives, i will pick it up.
Very interesting! Do you have a link to a source for this? Thanks for sharing!
You are correct. A 24-70/2.0 makes more sense from Sony plus there is no limitations on the camera.
I agree 100% this is more a video lens, if they made a 35-70 or 35-125 F2-2.8 that's smaller than the Tamron 35-150, perhaps with Internal zoom like most 70-200s
As for the flare issue, wouldn't the lens hood helped? I notice you didn't have it on.
Possibly
Would have preferred an f/2 aperture but with a more versatile focal range because I can't see any real world difference, as far as bokeh goes, between a 1.8 vs a 2.0......yes Sigma had the 24-35 f/2 but I think a 24-40 f/2 can be done
A 24-50/2.0 would be ideal.
Why was your exposure knob on +3? :O
Probably remapped to something else
Almost* ahahaa. Great focal range at 1.8 but I'm going to stick with my 24-70 GII for size size I mostly shoot video
SIGMA mainly made it for the L-Alliance where they have no 28 and 45 f/1.8 and photographers keep asking.
My primes are 1.4, 20-35-85. I see no use for a 28-45 1.8. I do have the Sigma 28-70 2.8. It’s my everyday lens if I had to pick one zoom.
My favorite afpc lens was the Sigma 50-100mm f1.8 art. Shooting at 100mm all day long gave creamy bokeh.
I wish it would do 20m-50mm even f2 is fine or 35mm-75mm is fine too
I carry a 28 Zeiss f2
I need this for my a6700 ❤❤❤
It will work for video and photography on the a6700.
A7cII + 24-50 F2.8 + 85 F1.8 = my ideal small bag carry. (assuming that you don't care much for an ultrawide)
I like your gear reviews! Reason I followed you a few years back, but I've also watched your CZcams influencer reflection videos; so understand if you need to stop :)
I'll go with the tiny 35/1.8. It'll be easier for me to walk back and forth than carry this 1kg lens all day long.
As someone who shoots 28/35/50 95% or the day for weddings I think it’s perfect.
they already have 28-70 mm, this lens is more for events and run and gun situation and can be good for anything (wedding, clubs), 45 is good enough and can get close to the subject by moving close, Manny sounded so disappointed like what do you expect? 28-105 1.8?
I see it as a Video and Corporate environmental portrait lens.
It'll be a great video lens and that's about it ..
It doesn't replace a 50mm because it doesn't zoom to 50mm
Its just not long of enough of a zoom range for me to justify the size and weight over using small and light primes. especially if you are using f1.8 primes. personally I would like to see a 35 to 85 portrait zoom. and it would have to be allot smaller and lighter than the Tamron 35 to 150 f2 - f2.8. for it to make sense.
What huge trigger is this one? And why so big lol
Get a gym membership
keeping my tamron 35 150
Weird focal length. That's why I'm returning my Sony 24-50. I feel so limited by that lens. I get why it received the criticism.
I'd rather carry a couple of primes than his lens. In my opinion Sigma missed the mark with this focal range.
100% agree
close but no quite enough on the telephoto end
It’s like I’d rather have 24mm idc for 50 I’d be good with 40 even but to be in the middle as a ranged 35 is annoying
100% disagree with you! This lens performs better than any set of 1.8 primes on the market, apart from the Leica f/2 APOs.
The lens I needed for my A7R5 .In crop mode up to 70-ish mm and paird with my 135 1.8 GM feels just prefect for me! 24-70 GM II has been sold ...
Will be selling my 24mm and 35mm 1.4 for this 😅
Why don't you use the lens hood against the sun? You would not have that flaring, I think.
The Tamron or Samyang 35-150mm is better
28-50 sounds better tbh alhough it's not that big of a diffrerence
Almost 😅
Oh come on Manny. You're not selling your 1.4s and 1.2 for this short zoom 1.8. this lens makes no sense, but I got to give it to sigma for making it. The canon F2 makes perfect sense with a longer zoom.
It`s good for video, but too heavy.
Wish Sigma made a M43 lens.
Never sell my 35mm sigma f 1.2 lens for this
Ghosting
Give me a break! You paid by Canon to be a disgrace for Sigma! Because 28 is the most used wide angle prime after the 35. Maybe not nowadays since there are a huge number of 24s that replaced the 28 of the classic era photography, but there is no way you didn't know this. And on top of that, this lens really renders like a set of primes, unlike the Canon 28-70 f2.
Another point, have you ever heard of the saying "horses for courses"? Why on earth would you f ask a 45mm 1.8 lens to behave like a 70mm? The whole point of this lens is to have a tool that replaces your wide to normal primes in your bag. You need more reach, get an 85 alongside or a 24-70 2.8 or the Canon 28-70 2! It is that simple. This lens has a more reserved zoom range because it retains the optical qualities of prime lens with more fidelity than a wider range zoom. It is that simple.
Hey man why so much hostility?
@@MannyOrtiz because is hilarious how people are trying to find problems for every solution and that is pissing me off! You're just not the first to criticize this lens for what it is not and it never proposed to be. I would choose this over the Canon 28-70 any day just because it renders beautifully and in fact, it renders better than most 1.8 primes. I never quite need 1.4 or 1.2 and never would I complain about 28 instead of 24 for portrait work, and I mean, I use a lot of wide end for environmental portraiture where I also need speed of reaction to change a focal length, so this lens really covers me incredibly well. In fact, I would also enjoy a 58-100 1.8 so I could do everything with just 2 bodies.
I am tired of constantly changing lenses or use a 2.8 zoom.
Am not in any way Sigma affiliated, but really, reviewers need to be more comprehensive of others needs if they really want to stick. Plenty of photographers I know are drooling over this lens and all of them are wedding photographers. You're a portrait photographer that does not really justify a zoom like this, but don't forget not everyone is like you or shooting like you, man. And I really, really appreciate your work and enthusiasm, but as I will never use a 200mm lens for portraiture because I find it pointless, that doesn't mean no one should do it. Some portrait photographers like to be closer to the subject in order to relate well and communicate well. My top end focal length is 105 for mature people and 135 for children.
This lens deserves a few rounds of applause, and I hope you don't take this personal, but as a reminder that some people have different views than you and by ignoring them, it doesn't mean other possibilities do not exist.
seriously that dude is triggered! I can’t believe how worked up people get over a lens or camera review.
Good Bye Manny!
why do they always make heavy lenses？ use plastic， i'd happy to buy a new lense when it break in 6 to 8 years, just make it light light light light.
Primes, for me, are a thing of the past.
This lens did not almost make you sell your primes but youtube clickbait, views, money, sponsorship, I get it lol
It’s just massive,way too big……
First comment
This comment is not sponsored by esquarespace😅
Same old paid AD... a 2.8 lens makes you sell the 1.2 lenses? :D Why these BS titles? We know you have to tell nice things about it, cause it is paid... but c'mon.
The title is clearly an irony, train your sense of humor.
@@jamesf3382 I don't think it's irony..
You wanna sell your primes for this? WTF 🤡🤦🏻♂️
I’ve never have rocked a third party lens.
this video almost made me cancel my subscription
You stutter back and forth a bit. Just say what you want to say. As a German speaker, I can hear that you can only partially recommend the lens. It just doesn't have the image quality of a prime lens. That's it. Easier to carry as three lenses but not as good as.
It’s interesting that you feel the need to criticize someone’s honest review. Not everyone needs to speak with absolute certainty to provide valuable insight. If you can’t appreciate that, maybe the problem isn’t with the reviewer but with your attitude.
@@stevens7409 and you are the judge of the judges to criticize others or what?
First comment
Oh sorry for me my is second😅