I posted this in my other thread but I figured it needs it's own thread.
There are 34 photos total.... 17 scenes... all at F1.4 for each lens focused with live view DPAF for consistency because it just works... no focus errors. I can 100% of the time pick out the ART lens it's that noticeable. 1.1GB total. I broke them into the 17 scenes so they are more manageable and easier to work with:
I highly recommend analyzing ALL scenes if you are on the fence for either. DISCLAIMER: Please be sure white balance is equal to both before comparing and you may have to slightly adjust exposure to match... I tried my best but light conditions are ever changing in real world. I tried my best to get it very close but evidently the white balance did get off in some. I ended up taking much more photos but these are the samples that I feel are closely matched at possible.
The 85L is a dog. I forgot how slow it was. I have some video and I can post a link later if need be but I'll put it to you like this... on a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being the fastest
10: Canon 85 1.8
9: Canon 70-200 2.8 II
8: Sigma 85 ART (possibly a 9 to a 9.5... I need the 85 1.8 to really compare right)
3: Canon 85 1.2 II
1: Canon 180mm Macro
Here is the video of the two. The Canon takes 78 frames total or 2.6 seconds to go from one end and back. The Sigma ART takes 25 frames total or .83 seconds.
So far very impressed but simply need more time. Right now I'd say the hit rate is about 97-98% which is on par with any other Canon glass I've owned.
Canon 85L is just lacking with the ART in the dead center but it's more of a lack of contrast. Edge sharpness the ART dominates.
No contest the ART wins. Wide open the ART simply has deeper darker colors and sharper edges. Texture of fabrics, plastics, etc are much more detailed with the art indicating it's micro-contrast resolving power is much higher than the Canon
ART still has some... but no way near the amount the canon has. The Canon leaves a purple glow which when removed via Lightroom dropper technique leaves a harsh low contrast fuzz along lines where the Sigma CA is very fine/defined and using the eyedropper leaves a sharp black line showing MUCH more contrast.
The Canon is just a smidge... and I do mean a very very small amount better even at 1.4 but it's DARN hard to tell the difference. Obviously the Canon can go to 1.2 and will surpass what the ART can do however all things considered if the Canon is 100% good at 1.4 the Sigma is 99% good it's that close.
The Sigma is indeed heavier/larger however when mounted and compared to the 85L they both really feel about the same. The Canon is front heavy and Ironically enough the Sigma weight is all mostly toward the rear of the lens... holding each setup on my 5D4 with one hand and with both they really feel and balance equally... yes there is a very very small more heft feeling with the ART but I don't feel it when moving the camera around from the hip to the eye switching from one hand to two etc... Sigma did a nice job keeping the weight centered to the back.
There is simply too much gains on the ART to win me over on Canon's 1/3 quicker and 3-4% better bokeh and those quickly go away just on the CA improvement alone... Just don't forget guys the Canon does do 1.2 and will ultimately be the better bokeh machine... You just have to decide of you want A: better bokeh or B: better everything else and 98% bokeh. For me the difference in the bokeh and the fact that 110% of the people would not even see it's difference makes the choice pretty clear.
I've posted a few samples below for those that are simply not interested in downloading the files.