Canon 85L 1.2 vs Sigma 85 1.4... Has anyone tried both?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by date Sort by votes
#22
The Digital Picture review with it mouse over comparison images is really useful. If you look at those subtle differences and decide the Canon is worth 2x the cost, then by all means, go for it.

Personally, I would buy the Sigma AND a nice used 135mm f/2L for the same money.
 
Upvote 0
#23
K-amps said:
While I have not worked with the Siggy 1.4, I have compared images of it on TDP: and the difference is pretty clear between the 2. If you go here http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-85mm-f-1.4-EX-DG-HSM-Lens-Review.aspx about 1/3 of the way down you see a Picture of a Girl taken at different apertures with the 85L and the Siggy 1.4 against a forst/ green background next to a Black cast iron Fence.

I find the Bokeh of the 85L to be better.... but your mileage may vary since Boken is subjective... however
Click to expand...

thanks for the link, i find it useful as it compare to other 85mm prime, but, from the Canon L, i can't see any difference between 1.2 vs 1.4.
 
Upvote 0
#24
Wedding photographer here. I normally do coverage with zooms (24-105, 24-70, 17-40 and 70-200) but am trying to work more with primes for the look. I've tried both the Canon and Sigma 85's and settled on the Sigma. I like the results and mine is just as sharp at f/1.4 as the Canon version I tried with my 5D3's. It's the only non Canon lens I own right now. I am so happy with it, I am considering the 35 1.4 that will be out in November.

In the past I have owned the Canon 50L, 50 f/1.4 and 50 f/1.8. I was not happy with any of those lenses for sharpness reasons. I borrowed a 50 1.4 Sigma and liked the results. I almost purchased one but have decided I want to use a 35mm/85mm combo for shooting weddings.

One thing I don't like is the filter size. I really wish all my pro lenses would use the same filter size. I like to use ND and Pol filters and it is PITA to deal with the different sizes while shooting.
 
Upvote 0
#25
Chris Geiger said:
One thing I don't like is the filter size. I really wish all my pro lenses would use the same filter size. I like to use ND and Pol filters and it is PITA to deal with the different sizes while shooting.
Click to expand...

I don't understand. The Sigma 85 uses a 77mm filter, the same as your other lenses. Or are you referring to the smaller filter on the new 35mm?
 
Upvote 0
#26
I did a wedding with a rented 85 1.2 and bought the Sigma after that. The comparision is easy:
The 85L has a very nice special look but you have a lot of shrap behause the AF is so slow that your subject is leaving Deep of Field at 1.2 before the AF finished. You get only really good pics and a lot of scrap nothing in between.

The Sigma is much sharper, do have a quick AF and you get much much more pics really good and I get only 10% scrap instead of 60-70% scrap. The look is 90-95% as with the Canon an you need a 1:1 comparison to see a difference.
For wining a a concours I would prefer the Canon, for a wedding or Kids I will always take the Sigma.

I like your approach about filter size. The Sigma 50 1,4 I chosed only to have the same 77mm than all my other lenses. It's very practical while shooting primes to remove the caps from one lens and put it on the removed one immediately. I would use an adapter for the 67>77mm filter for the 35mm Sigma.
 
Upvote 0
#27
K-amps said:
Even the Quantity of OOF blur is more with the 85L at the same aperture. e.g. Compare the tree trunk blur behind the girl with both lenses at f1.4, the 85L melts it so much more... in fact the 85L at F2 has as much subjective blur as the Siggy does at F1.4... this is where the 85 L shines. I don't know of many lenses that can melt away the background like the 85L.... but you Pay for it :)
Click to expand...

+ 1 I already have noticed that.
 
Upvote 0
#30
Enthusiast said:
I did a wedding with a rented 85 1.2 and bought the Sigma after that. The comparision is easy:
The 85L has a very nice special look but you have a lot of shrap behause the AF is so slow that your subject is leaving Deep of Field at 1.2 before the AF finished. You get only really good pics and a lot of scrap nothing in between.
Click to expand...

Interesting... A little of movement and the pic is focused in the ears :S with all the eyes blurry.

Thanks for pointing this out
 
Upvote 0
#35
Here's a natural light portrait at f/2. Notice the detail in her face. Incredibly sharp:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/32275661/5dMk2-Sigma-f2.CR2

Here's a shot from a concert at f/1.4 under stage lighting (also shows off 5D Mk 3 ISO 6400 performance):
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/32275661/5dMk3-Sidma-f1.4.CR2

Here's a shot at f/2 showing nice circular bokeh of lights in the background:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/32275661/5dMk3-Sigma-f2.dng

Here's a shot at f/1.4 showing smoothly rendered out of focus areas:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/32275661/5dMk2-Sigma-f1.4.CR2

Finally for the Sigma, here's a f/2 shot showing great color and contrast rendering in natural light:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/32275661/5dMk2-Sigma-f2-kid.CR2

Here's one from the Canon 85mm f/1.2L II:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/32275661/7d-CanonMk2-f1.2.CR2
 
Upvote 0
#36
bchernicoff said:
Here's a natural light portrait at f/2. Notice the detail in her face. Incredibly sharp:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/32275661/5dMk2-Sigma-f2.CR2

Here's a shot from a concert at f/1.4 under stage lighting (also shows off 5D Mk 3 ISO 6400 performance):
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/32275661/5dMk3-Sidma-f1.4.CR2

Here's a shot at f/2 showing nice circular bokeh of lights in the background:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/32275661/5dMk3-Sigma-f2.dng

Here's a shot at f/1.4 showing smoothly rendered out of focus areas:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/32275661/5dMk2-Sigma-f1.4.CR2

Finally for the Sigma, here's a f/2 shot showing great color and contrast rendering in natural light:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/32275661/5dMk2-Sigma-f2-kid.CR2

Here's one from the Canon 85mm f/1.2L II:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/32275661/7d-CanonMk2-f1.2.CR2
Click to expand...

Thanks a lot!!! those sigma files looks pretty well!!

Btw. I already have seen the photo of the redhead girl making the funny face elsewhere, did you make an review of the lens?? or post it on flickr???
 
Upvote 0
#37
Cptn Rigo said:
Thanks a lot!!! those sigma files looks pretty well!!

Btw. I already have seen the photo of the redhead girl making the funny face elsewhere, did you make an review of the lens?? or post it on flickr???
Click to expand...

She's my fiance and I've probably posted that picture on here before. Speaking of that picture, we were walking on the beach and spun around and made that face. You can see that I didn't get the focus perfect, but at least it was usable. If I had the Canon there is no way it would have focused in time to catch the moment.

There is one factor regarding the Canon that you might consider...the warm, special feeling of knowing and being able to say that you own one of the most highly regarded lenses in the world.
 
Upvote 0
#38
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

R
RF 85 F1.2 & RF 24-70 F2.8 Autofocus Noise - This Can't Be Normal...
Replies
1
Views
3K
RCH111
R
A
Canon RF 24/1.8 versus Sigma 28/1.4
Replies
18
Views
11K
SwissFrank
S
axtstern
Thoughts on the folly of buying an exciting camera of the future but then being stuck in the past.
Replies
18
Views
6K
scyrene
S
P
First impressions of a mirrorless late adopter, 7D2 -> R6
Replies
7
Views
8K
chik0240
C
P
135L autofocus performance - have I got a lemon?
Replies
11
Views
4K
Kiton
K
Top Bottom
Home
Forums
Media
Menu