Sigma 85mm f/1.4 or Zeiss 135 f/2 APO?

Hello,

I have the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 and I've been quite please with it for portraits. I generally don't shoot action so manual focus is not an issue for me. I also have other MF lenses.
Aaaand yesterday I tested out the Zeiss 135mm f/2 APO - the results are stunning. I'm talking about color rendition, sharpness and lack of CA.

The bad thing is that I didn't have the Sigma with me to test it side by side, I only had my 35mm Zeiss and of course it didn't help.
I would be very grateful if someone who shot with both lenses could give me some advice - should I sell the Sigma and get the Zeiss?

I shot with Canon 135 f/2 and I liked it. However, compared to Sigma 85 its debatable. Somehow I believe that Zeiss would be better. But I'd like to have more opinions.

I just got the ZE 135/2 APO. Yes ! If 135 is the mm you need, you probably cannot do better. MF is just not an issue for me. The ZE makes it easy.

gasrocks wrote in post #16910599
I just got the ZE 135/2 APO. Yes ! If 135 is the mm you need, you probably cannot do better. MF is just not an issue for me. The ZE makes it easy.

Right, I'm quite at home with MF myself too. I had the Zeiss 85 f/1.4 for a while and I had no problems with it.

But it appears that there are not too many people who worked with Sigma AND Zeiss.

I had the Leica R 80/1.4, EF 85/1.8, EF 85/1.2 and others - all used with MF. Right now I use a Mamiya Sekor 85/1.7, Nikon 85/1.8 HC, Leica R 90/2, etc. Oh ya, had the Vivitar 85/1.4 which is really a bang for the buck but sold it. Gene

Xalanx wrote in post #16911046
Right, I'm quite at home with MF myself too. I had the Zeiss 85 f/1.4 for a while and I had no problems with it.

But it appears that there are not too many people who worked with Sigma AND Zeiss.

This is probably going to not come out the way it's meant to, but...

I would think the folks that buy Sigma buy Sigma partly for the price.

Whereas Zeiss buyers don't care about the price, they go strictly for quality.

If I could, I'd have Zeiss, but my CFO (aka wife) would never allow it, and I also don't trust my eyes enough anymore for manual focus.

Yea, I didn't say anything about the price. But 135 f/2 is quite ok price-wise (unlike the Otus for example). And if I sell the Sigma that's almost half of Zeiss' price.
You don't have to trust your eyes, Zeiss has focus confirmation and it works perfectly.

Xalanx wrote in post #16912191
You don't have to trust your eyes, Zeiss has focus confirmation and it works perfectly.

A little trust is required unfortunately. Typically for fast lenses (>f/2.8) the target focus is to within 1/3 DoF (ie, a Canon lens using AF) whilst slower lenses are "within DoF". The focus confirmation seems to be the latter no matter how large the aperture is on an MF lens (can anybody confirm?)

With other Zeiss lenses (35/1.4, 50/1,4 and even to some extent the 85/1.4) then it's somewhat acceptable. The 135/2 close up is a challenge (for me at least) and I've taken to using an 'S' screen or split prism on a 1Dx rather than trust the standard matte on a 5D3.

Bob

Canon Bob wrote in post #16912261
A little trust is required unfortunately. Typically for fast lenses (>f/2.8) the target focus is to within 1/3 DoF (ie, a Canon lens using AF) whilst slower lenses are "within DoF". The focus confirmation seems to be the latter no matter how large the aperture is on an MF lens (can anybody confirm?)

With other Zeiss lenses (35/1.4, 50/1,4 and even to some extent the 85/1.4) then it's somewhat acceptable. The 135/2 close up is a challenge (for me at least) and I've taken to using an 'S' screen or split prism on a 1Dx rather than trust the standard matte on a 5D3.

Bob

Well, for me it worked flawlessly during my test - but of course the test was limited. However the shop is quite dark and still the focus worked with confirmation every time.

It seems that indeed not many people compared sigma and zeiss.

I only use MF (no focus confirm, no Liveview) for all my photography. The ZE 135/2 APO is easy to MF and gives me a highr keeper rate than most any other lens.