Mini Review: Sigma 85mm 1.4 ART vs Canon 85L 1.2 II (34 raw images)

dochollidayda wrote in post #18196551
Is it just me or the Canon seems to have a much longer focus throw? Sigma pretty much trumps the Canon hands down. I don't shoot this focal length but always admire what pros come up with.

The canon MFD is 37.5" while the Art is 33.5". So in all actuality the sigma has a longer throw. The manual focus ring on the sigma turns the lens slow like a manual focus lens.

What your seeing is just how fast the sigma focuses. It's by far faster than any of the other art primes.

I can understand that the Sigma is sharper, but not as much as in your comparison, at least in the center.

I have a good copy of the 85L v2, and this is what it looks like in the center on an almost 50% higher density sensor than the 5D4.
This is a 100% crop of 85L @ f/1.2 at MFD on a Sony A7R2; left is straight out of camera (default Lr6.7 development, color balanced), and right is after sharpening. Subject is some engravings on another lens. Notice the blooming on the blue channel, but you can see how there is no white blooming unlike on your lens (which is possibly decentered).

Have you analyzed all scenes? The Canon is sharp... just the sigma is sharper. Here is another sample that does not include sunlit areas in the center. The differences are less but the sigma is still easily picked.

Also I would be more than glad to let you buy the art for your own personal testing. I'd love to see more samples. I unfortunately have no interest in the canon but I know others are very interested in these differences. One must note that no matter canon or sigma every manufacture has consistency variances. Typically canons have less copy to copy variances which is one other thing to consider.

And while I was at it...
Both MFD, lightly sharpened on a 42 MP sensor. Didn't correct the CA.
The 50 was awful before being calibrated by Canon (they did an awesome job).

may I ask would you recommend Canon f/1.8 or this Sigma f/1.4 ART?

Ah-keong wrote in post #18196588
may I ask would you recommend Canon f/1.8 or this Sigma f/1.4 ART?

VERY different budgets. Could not recommend one or the other. Two completely different class lenses.

CheshireCat wrote in post #18196582
And while I was at it...
Both MFD, lightly sharpened on a 42 MP sensor. Didn't correct the CA.
The 50 was awful before being calibrated by Canon (they did an awesome job).

Hosted photo: posted by CheshireCat in
./showthread.php?p=181​96582&i=i109107354
forum: Canon Lenses

Your sample is not the same as my sample. Yours does not have direct sunlight on this image. You cannot compare mine to yours with my sample to yours.

This is a slightly off center 50% crop. When you get the contrast edges out of direct sunlight and into shade the purple fringing goes away alot I don't feel your sample was in bright sunlight and my sample was also exposed for the room causing the white label on the printer to be over exposed where your sample is properly exposed. Again NOT the same comparison. That white label being over exposed is not really proper however both lenses exposed the same so you can see worst case situations. Your comparing oranges to tangerines (per the attached lol). Your attachment is the 85L and 50L both of which are soft wide open.

See this for example... no purple fringing on either.

The results shown in this thread are typical to every 85L II I've personally ever seen. There is a very large collection of lab data to support the sharpness of the 85L and it's serious problem handling purple fringe. I don't see why there is a need to puff out your chest about the 85L to help better justify your personal purchase, but the results being demonstrated here are normal.

If anything, a copy of the 85L II that is ultra sharp and doesn't suffer from purple fringe is atypical to what owners and users should expect from buying the Canon.

CamaroSS wrote in post #18196775
If anything, a copy of the 85L II that is ultra sharp and doesn't suffer from purple fringe is atypical to what owners and users should expect from buying the Canon.

I am _not_ talking about purple fringe (i.e. longitudinal CA), because every copy does that by lens design. My example shows it too (blue fringe on fluorescent light), and it clearly seems that the Sigma is better corrected for that aberration (although far from Otus levels).
I am talking about the white asymmetrical halos in the shot of the cables.
It is also important to note that DPAF is just another AF, and is therefore favoring some light frequency. As these lens are not apochromatic, and depending also on lens design, DPAF may choose a different focus than what a human would by critical manual focusing.

CheshireCat wrote in post #18196814
I am _not_ talking about purple fringe (i.e. longitudinal CA), because every copy does that by lens design. My example shows it too (blue fringe on fluorescent light), and it clearly seems that the Sigma is better corrected for that aberration (although far from Otus levels).
I am talking about the white asymmetrical halos in the shot of the cables.
It is also important to note that DPAF is just another AF, and is therefore favoring some light frequency. As these lens are not apochromatic, and depending also on lens design, DPAF may choose a different focus than what a human would by critical manual focusing.

Remember that area specifically is overexposed by almost 3 stops. Had I exposed for the label in question that would not be present but the rest of the image would of been dark. Your picking at one scene when the rest of the sample shots don't experience to that degree.

CheshireCat wrote in post #18196567
I can understand that the Sigma is sharper, but not as much as in your comparison, at least in the center.

I have a good copy of the 85L v2, and this is what it looks like in the center on an almost 50% higher density sensor than the 5D4.
This is a 100% crop of 85L @ f/1.2 at MFD on a Sony A7R2; left is straight out of camera (default Lr6.7 development, color balanced), and right is after sharpening.

Hosted photo: posted by CheshireCat in
./showthread.php?p=181​96567&i=i230773289
forum: Canon Lenses

you are not really comparing a completely different camera, without AA Filter? in terms of sharpness? The Canon 85L is known for many things. but not for his sharpness open wide.

Defffondo wrote in post #18197020
you are not really comparing a completely different camera, without AA Filter? in terms of sharpness? The Canon 85L is known for many things. but not for his sharpness open wide.

If it were really not sharp enough to resolve normal 20 MP Canon sensors, then how could it be sharp on 42 MP sensor without AA ?
The lens has some field curvature causing lower MTF at the edges, but it is not a problem on real subjects.
Since I don't shoot charts, I believe the 85L should be compared wide open, as I paid for the extra aperture for artistic purposes.

Talley

You need to get that 85 art out in a dark room like a reception dance floor and see how its going to lock in low light. My assistant had the 35 art on her new D750 and it would not lock for beans in low light. When we put her Nikon 5o back on the body, there was no issue locking in the reception lighting.

I saw this first hand and I have read about this from others

If that new 85 cant hit in poor light is going to be useless for wedding photographers. Anxious to see what other have to say about this, especially wedding photographers

umphotography wrote in post #18197491
Talley

You need to get that 85 art out in a dark room like a reception dance floor and see how its going to lock in low light. My assistant had the 35 art on her new D750 and it would not lock for beans in low light. When we put her Nikon 5o back on the body, there was no issue locking in the reception lighting.

I saw this first hand and I have read about this from others

If that new 85 cant hit in poor light is going to be useless for wedding photographers. Anxious to see what other have to say about this, especially wedding photographers

I'll see what I can do... unfortunately I don't encounter those environments. Or that could be called fortunately

you mentioned your 85L is a UB, isn't it like one of the early ones from the late 80s?
The 85L II focus quite a bit faster, though I am sure it can't still match any of the 85 f1.4 and f1.8 lenses.