Sigma 85mm f/1.4 ART Review

[BeenThere]

Dustin: Do you know how the performance of the 85 Art compares to the Milvus 85 ? I recently bought the Classic 100mm f2.0 makro-planar and was wondering about getting the best 85 out there and the Milvus looks solid. And the 100mm is outstanding.

The Milvus is smaller but a bit heavier (Zeiss density!). I would say in absolute sharpness they are very similar but with a slight edge to the Sigma. Sigma has far less vignette. Milvus has better CA control and microcontrast, so images might look a bit sharper overall from the Milvus. Build and weather sealing edge to the Milvus, though the Sigma is very nicely made and does have some weather sealing. Of course the big deal is that the Sigma has autofocus, which is all that most photographers need to hear. You're obviously okay with MF glass, but I still think that should be a part of your decision process. The Sigma is cheaper, too.

I would say that I (slightly) prefer the Zeiss rendering and bokeh, but that's really a taste thing.

One thing I wasn't crazy about on the Milvus is that it is so squat that I found there wasn't a lot of finger room between the grip and lens barrel.

There's give and take all around. I can't really tell you one is better than the other. They are different.

Thanks for your thorough answer, much appriciated !

Perhaps I will hold off and wait to see what the new Canon 85 L will be like 8)

If history is any guide, you will see similar sharpness, much better CA, and double the price in the next Canon 85mm.

 

[Viggo]

Dustin: Do you know how the performance of the 85 Art compares to the Milvus 85 ? I recently bought the Classic 100mm f2.0 makro-planar and was wondering about getting the best 85 out there and the Milvus looks solid. And the 100mm is outstanding.

The Milvus is smaller but a bit heavier (Zeiss density!). I would say in absolute sharpness they are very similar but with a slight edge to the Sigma. Sigma has far less vignette. Milvus has better CA control and microcontrast, so images might look a bit sharper overall from the Milvus. Build and weather sealing edge to the Milvus, though the Sigma is very nicely made and does have some weather sealing. Of course the big deal is that the Sigma has autofocus, which is all that most photographers need to hear. You're obviously okay with MF glass, but I still think that should be a part of your decision process. The Sigma is cheaper, too.

I would say that I (slightly) prefer the Zeiss rendering and bokeh, but that's really a taste thing.

One thing I wasn't crazy about on the Milvus is that it is so squat that I found there wasn't a lot of finger room between the grip and lens barrel.

There's give and take all around. I can't really tell you one is better than the other. They are different.

Thanks for your thorough answer, much appriciated !

Perhaps I will hold off and wait to see what the new Canon 85 L will be like 8)

If history is any guide, you will see similar sharpness, much better CA, and double the price in the next Canon 85mm.

... and the best possible AF, which I'm willing to pay for.

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

Dustin: Do you know how the performance of the 85 Art compares to the Milvus 85 ? I recently bought the Classic 100mm f2.0 makro-planar and was wondering about getting the best 85 out there and the Milvus looks solid. And the 100mm is outstanding.

The Milvus is smaller but a bit heavier (Zeiss density!). I would say in absolute sharpness they are very similar but with a slight edge to the Sigma. Sigma has far less vignette. Milvus has better CA control and microcontrast, so images might look a bit sharper overall from the Milvus. Build and weather sealing edge to the Milvus, though the Sigma is very nicely made and does have some weather sealing. Of course the big deal is that the Sigma has autofocus, which is all that most photographers need to hear. You're obviously okay with MF glass, but I still think that should be a part of your decision process. The Sigma is cheaper, too.

I would say that I (slightly) prefer the Zeiss rendering and bokeh, but that's really a taste thing.

One thing I wasn't crazy about on the Milvus is that it is so squat that I found there wasn't a lot of finger room between the grip and lens barrel.

There's give and take all around. I can't really tell you one is better than the other. They are different.

Thanks for your thorough answer, much appriciated !

Perhaps I will hold off and wait to see what the new Canon 85 L will be like 8)

If history is any guide, you will see similar sharpness, much better CA, and double the price in the next Canon 85mm.

... and the best possible AF, which I'm willing to pay for.

That's definitely a consideration, though, to be fair, the 85 ART was the best focusing Sigma lens I've personally used outside of the 150-600 Sport.

 

[Viggo]

Dustin: Do you know how the performance of the 85 Art compares to the Milvus 85 ? I recently bought the Classic 100mm f2.0 makro-planar and was wondering about getting the best 85 out there and the Milvus looks solid. And the 100mm is outstanding.

The Milvus is smaller but a bit heavier (Zeiss density!). I would say in absolute sharpness they are very similar but with a slight edge to the Sigma. Sigma has far less vignette. Milvus has better CA control and microcontrast, so images might look a bit sharper overall from the Milvus. Build and weather sealing edge to the Milvus, though the Sigma is very nicely made and does have some weather sealing. Of course the big deal is that the Sigma has autofocus, which is all that most photographers need to hear. You're obviously okay with MF glass, but I still think that should be a part of your decision process. The Sigma is cheaper, too.

I would say that I (slightly) prefer the Zeiss rendering and bokeh, but that's really a taste thing.

One thing I wasn't crazy about on the Milvus is that it is so squat that I found there wasn't a lot of finger room between the grip and lens barrel.

There's give and take all around. I can't really tell you one is better than the other. They are different.

Thanks for your thorough answer, much appriciated !

Perhaps I will hold off and wait to see what the new Canon 85 L will be like 8)

If history is any guide, you will see similar sharpness, much better CA, and double the price in the next Canon 85mm.

... and the best possible AF, which I'm willing to pay for.

That's definitely a consideration, though, to be fair, the 85 ART was the best focusing Sigma lens I've personally used outside of the 150-600 Sport.

I'm sure that's true, but after two 35 Art and three 50 Art lenses with all of them focusing highly inconsistent I'm very hard to convince to try yet another one, lol.

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

I'm sure that's true, but after two 35 Art and three 50 Art lenses with all of them focusing highly inconsistent I'm very hard to convince to try yet another one, lol.
[/quote]

And that's very valid. It's your money, and you get to vote with it.

 

[Alex_M]

Viggo,
I went through 3 of 35 Art and 3 of 50 Art lenses and none was AF consistent enough for me. This 85 Art lens in nothing like that. Not a single serious miss so far.

 

[Viggo]

Viggo,
I went through 3 of 35 Art and 3 of 50 Art lenses and none was AF consistent enough for me. This 85 Art lens in nothing like that. Not a single serious miss so far.

That makes me really happy to hear! I will try it later on for sure, but that Zeiss 100 is magic so far Hopefully they will update the 50 and 35 to the same AF and they can have all my money, at least for the 50 and 85

 

[Alex_M]

Viggo,
I am quite sure that 35 and 50 Art wil be updated in near future. for next 3-6 months I do expect 24-70 F2.8 IS Art and 70-200 F2.8 IS Sports to be released. There are 2 more lenses from Sigma that I would like to see released as soon as available: 135 F2.0 IS Art and 300 2.8 IS Sports.

Viggo,
I went through 3 of 35 Art and 3 of 50 Art lenses and none was AF consistent enough for me. This 85 Art lens in nothing like that. Not a single serious miss so far.

That makes me really happy to hear! I will try it later on for sure, but that Zeiss 100 is magic so far Hopefully they will update the 50 and 35 to the same AF and they can have all my money, at least for the 50 and 85

 

[Jopa]

That's definitely a consideration, though, to be fair, the 85 ART was the best focusing Sigma lens I've personally used outside of the 150-600 Sport.

The 120-300 Sport also has quite reliable and fast AF. I think Sigma had no choice to go with the old cr@ppy AF in the new 500mm f/4, and most likely the same technology came to the rest of the Art/Sports series now. The technology is called YCTTAF ("you can trust this AF" ).

 

[Berowne]

... P.S. I'm not quite sure where you are getting the notion that the Sigma 85 ART is more of a "dedicated portrait lens" than what any other 85mm lens is. I would say that portraits are one of the primary purposes for any 85mm lens, but that people also use them in a variety of other ways - from events to general purpose to landscapes. I don't know that I would say the 85 ART is more "tweaked" to a single purpose any more than any 85mm lens. It's very capable in a lot of settings - including at infinity: ...

I've been using this focal length for many years with analog gear (Leicaflex SL2 - Leica-R Elmarit 2.8/90mm). My prefered lens now is the EF-S 60/2.8 with Canon 70D. It simply depends on the Motive and whether you are used to this perspective or not.

BTW: Thanks for your Review, Dustin. My son - now, like Dad and Grandpa crazy with Photography in the third Generation - is talking repeatingly about the Sigma 85 ART. This Review will not stop it.

 

[Kit Lens Jockey]

Only minor gripe I have with this lens is the massive 86mm filter size. I've been buying all of my filters at 82mm, the size of my largest lens (outside of my 150-600), and I figured that would be big enough that I could step them down to fit on any other lens I bought. Apparently not this beast. Not a huge detractor, but that's just such a weird and massive filter thread size.

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

... P.S. I'm not quite sure where you are getting the notion that the Sigma 85 ART is more of a "dedicated portrait lens" than what any other 85mm lens is. I would say that portraits are one of the primary purposes for any 85mm lens, but that people also use them in a variety of other ways - from events to general purpose to landscapes. I don't know that I would say the 85 ART is more "tweaked" to a single purpose any more than any 85mm lens. It's very capable in a lot of settings - including at infinity: ...

I've been using this focal length for many years with analog gear (Leicaflex SL2 - Leica-R Elmarit 2.8/90mm). My prefered lens now is the EF-S 60/2.8 with Canon 70D. It simply depends on the Motive and whether you are used to this perspective or not.

BTW: Thanks for your Review, Dustin. My son - now, like Dad and Grandpa crazy with Photography in the third Generation - is talking repeatingly about the Sigma 85 ART. This Review will not stop it.

It's an expensive hobby to hand on to the next generation

 

[JoeWhitnallPhotography]

This lens looks like an awesome piece of kit!!