Lens Comparison: Sigma 35mm f/1.4 "Art" vs. Canon 35mm f/1.4L USM

[@theisismedia]

I very rarely comment on reviews but that was probably the best lens review I have seen. Great content, clearly explained and high production values. Fantastic work.

[@hicaylaji]

Zebra Digital agreeeeeed! 👍🏻

[@StefanHillen]

I finally bought the 35mm SIGMA two and a half months ago and never regretted it. It's my favorite lens at weddings now and I'm using it at 75% of the time! :-)

[@EdwardBliffin]

I just rented it this weekend before I buy it because I've heard so many mixed reviews about the focusing. It does miss focus looking thru the VF, but in LV I had no issues. I'm using a Canon T8i

[@NickSchreger]

Thanks for taking the time to do this - made it easy for me to decide which lens to get

[@JessieYoung]

I've never seen a more informative comparison video. Awesome.

[@MatthewGore]

Thanks Jessie

[@killerflakes1]

Wow this is one of the best reviews i have seen on youtube, thanks man, great job.

[@carlopezrueda]

Buen review!!! ya viste, rentemos los 2 y sacamos nuestras conclusiones :)

[@danielhanslik4112]

When Canon gives you lemons, you buy a Sigma.

[@69_MK]

When life gives you lemons, make lemonade.

[@elophostia]

Mandeep Kalsi it's kinda obvious, you shouldn't say it

[@abbycurtis1768]

I LoVE IT

[@timnix7942]

@@69_MK Hopefully life gave you some sugar and some water as well.

[@adrianomoreira1341]

Matthew your reviews are serious and very detailed! Thankyou so much!

[@Kourosmenis]

Matthew, thank you for your videos (especially the comparison vids) You present information beautifully and in a way that is clear, comprehensive and useful. DON'T STOP PRODUCING! You are great at it.

[@CraigVolpe]

Your lack of dogma is refreshing both in the video and your answers to peoples questions. Keep up the good work!

[@Bacchinif]

We want more reviews, please. You're the best reviewer on KZbin! I'd like to see a comparison between Canon 85 F1.8 and Canon 85 F.12.

[@Mrlolibre]

Yes the sigma is better ,but the Canon 35mm 1.4L is still damn good for a lens released back in 1998.

[@TonyLopezArts]

+firstname lastname if you look for Canon Buy/Sell/Trade forums, they go for $700-$900 now. Canon 35 F1.4 is now affordable used.

[@TonyLopezArts]

+firstname lastname because why not. It's still a sharp lens.

[@TonyLopezArts]

+firstname lastname in the end it's not about the gear. You can use whatever you want. But if your pictures don't tell a story, what's the point?

[@TonyLopezArts]

+firstname lastname plus, the differences don't matter to the end client. I'm shooting with what I believe does the job.

[@fernandomonreal4682]

not IMO, the Leica 35 ASPH 1.4 summilux is very old and come close or even perform better than this two, the colors in the Leica lens are to me just awesome and the size and weight is incredible on the Leica for such a high performance, anyway i don´t want to argue all the three lens are the best 35 f/1.4 a viable, to me Sigma wins cause the price, i owned the Leica for a long time and i have a collection of amazing photos, but that said the Sigma is a temptation now

[@telelaci2]

I like the style of your reviews. Much more practical and useful than the usual tube reviews. They put the accent on the show.

[@KocaMetallec]

I can write 5-6 comments with full 500 characters to express how much I appreciate your detailed and "no-one done that before " work. (Because this comparisons of lenses means a lot to us who live in poor country where the borrowing lens for one day cost almost 1/10 of the price of the new) But I'll gonna just say: Tnx. FOREVER SUBSCRIBER.

[@greatirishday]

Matthew, this is one of the best lens review videos I've seen in the three to four years that I've been pursuing photography. I bought the Sigma 35mm 1.4 "Art" lens a few months ago but just saw your video now. Well done, please keep up the good work and post more!

[@hicaylaji]

Thank you for doing my homework for me, and clarifying which lens I need to get. I JUST ordered it. Great and clear video, with time and care taken into the edits. Must have taken forever! ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️

[@MatthewGore]

Glad it was useful for you :-)

[@canifotografie8420]

Thanks Matthew for doing these detailed reviews! I am in the market for the Sigma 24mm 1.4, can't wait to see your video about this lens. Greetings from the rooftop of the world (Nepal)

[@TheMontagueFilms]

thank you for this. I was 2 hours away from buying the Canon. You just saved me $400

[@MatthewGore]

There's actually a flash deal on this lens on Amazon today, for $699... so hopefully you saved more than that :) goo.gl/IrXxh8

[@TheMontagueFilms]

Woh! Thanks Matthew!

[@eviem70]

Montague Films, my gosh did he save me lots of money as well. I shoot with a Canon and I’ve always bought Canon everything, but I’m definitely buying this lens.

[@ItsBrianaB]

@@eviem70 do u shoot video? if so, how is the stabilizaion?

[@aymw9259]

I've seen so many photographer comparing lenses. Nobody did what you do. Your way of comparing lenses side by side is the best ever in KZbin videos. I subscribed. Keep up the good work.

[@panyiaxiong82]

omg!!!! It's the best comparison video out there on KZbin! Love it! It's so helpful and informative! please on continue to make more videos!

[@saraplett5329]

This review was so helpful!!!! Thank you so much for your hard work and clear explanations of the differences between these lenses

[@MatthewGore]

Glad you found it helpful, Sara :-)

[@mcroman-superfeat]

COPY THIS; Very rarely comment on reviews but that was probably the best lens review I have seen. Great content, clearly explained and high production values. Fantastic work. ;) ....

[@crazyRyoga]

kudos to sigma for the lens and the materials used fot it. Canon should really avoid plastic when making L lenses, because they cost a LOT.

[@BigPulleyPapi]

thats true but you trade off in weight.

[@stefansmuts8882]

One of the best reviews I've seen in a long time

[@travishunt7248]

Great Job! You did a very good job at showing the comparison. I really appreciate it!

[@MuahMan]

Those skate park images were awesome.

[@wjfmarketing]

Fantastic review. Perhaps the best photography review/videos on KZbin. Thanks.

[@chronocross85]

I bought the Sigma. It is my sharpest lens I own

[@makerKID5]

When the lens gives you lemons.......

[@nkosiakinlabi3135]

Thank you. That was a very nice review. You gave me insight on both lens!

[@NeilSnapePhotography]

Nice to see a realistic review, real world samples, rather than resolution tests.

[@gary831206]

What a nice and detailed comparison!!! Thank you for making the video! It's really helpful!!!

[@leonguyen4458]

As someone who likes to study before they buy, your reviews honestly blow your online peers out of the water (digital rev, jared polin ect.)

[@MatthewGore]

Leo Nguyen Thanks, Leo :-)

[@leonguyen4458]

Any chance that you will do a comparison with the 135mm sigma art with the 135mm canon in the future? or the 85mm

[@MatthewGore]

Very likely. I'm working on 24-70mm videos now, with the Sigma, the Tamron, and Canon II, and I shot for one telephoto zoom set.

[@leonguyen4458]

Yo Matt you on 500px or Instagram? I want to drop a follow :) already subbed and belled up to your channel. looking forward to more content.

[@MatthewGore]

Yes! instagram.com/matthew.lightandmatter/ I'm on 500px too, but never use it anymore. You can find the rest of my social media through the website: www.lightandmatter.org

[@TheRcEngineer]

Now thats what i would call a review, awesome.

[@dans.8198]

The CA you do not expect to see at f/8 is of the lateral type, and as such it is not reduced by a smaller aperture. Correcting lateral CA is easy and improves resolution.

[@MatthewGore]

In my experience, even lateral CAs are usually improved by stopping down a lens. For a good example of this, take a look at my most recent video and the Tamron 35mm f/1.8. It has strong(ish) lateral CA at larger apertures, easily visible in the video, and they disappear after I stop down a few stops. As for correcting lateral chromatic aberration, it's true that it can be handled pretty easily in post processing, but not without image degradation, and never completely. I won't get into all the details here, but I'll cut and paste the Wiki bullet points: - Rescaling is only applicable to lateral chromatic aberration but there is also longitudinal chromatic aberration - Rescaling individual color channels result in a loss of resolution from the original image - Most camera sensors only capture a few and discrete (e.g., RGB) color channels but chromatic aberration is not discrete and occurs across the light spectrum - The dyes used in the digital camera sensors for capturing color are not very efficient so cross-channel color contamination is unavoidable and causes, for example, the chromatic aberration in the red channel to also be blended into the green channel along with any green chromatic aberration.

[@MatthewGore]

Thanks for the suggestion; I've been thinking about that one... or the Canon vs the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8, which is also a pretty worthy lens. I'll keep it in mind.

[@meelaner]

Very nice and helpful review! One of the best I've seen so far. Keep up the great work :)

[@xTheRealSickNick]

Please keep doing these lens comparisons. they are truly great! I'd love to see one between the Nikon, Tamron and Canon 70mm-200mm 2.8 lenses.

[@shantanubiswas7777]

Best review I have ever seen of this Sigma lens

[@MatthewGore]

Shantanu Biswas Thanks!

[@shantanubiswas7777]

Welcome

[@emmanuelarredondo5365]

Thank you for this simple but extensive video! Love the non biased review too

[@Amrlebran]

The best lens comparison ever .. you have done a great job .. respect from exclusive records

[@MatthewGore]

Thanks! I just bought a new turntable... I'm about to check out your channel :-)

[@Amrlebran]

Matthew Gore You welcome bro i am growing my channel now .. you also do videography ?

[@MatthewGore]

No, I've pretty much just been a photographer for over 20 years. I have been getting interested in video over the past few years, but I don't consider myself a pro yet.

[@Amrlebran]

Matthew Gore i got it well if in future i am looking for model photography i will contact you and i live in us dc I subscribed you and .. nice to meet you ..

[@MatthewGore]

Great to meet you too :-) I'm in Seattle, so it's a bit of a distance, but I'm always happy to travel for a good shoot. Best of luck with your channel!

[@RobberZhi]

this is exactly how a comparison of this kind should be done. great video.

[@chrishastings]

Best Comparison Video I have seen on the web very Pro Matthew, well done.

[@PeacePham1991]

This is a very professional review. Thank you for taking the time to do this

[@richmck007]

After watching again, Sigma wins! After all is said and done, just look at the price! You will not get a worse lens by not purchasing the canon! ...Was well worth your video again! Certainly hope you do all you can to get back to me!

[@tomatosarus]

I really enjoy your reviews and nice photos. Thank you for your excellent work!

[@OlHoch]

flawless Comparison, keep it up Matt !

[@terolah]

Thanks for these great reviews! I found these extremely well made and the comparisons very helpfull! Thank You and hope to see some more!

[@poddagod]

This is how a review should be done!

[@watersofthesouth]

Great review, both in depth and explanation, congrats!

[@Tofu1998]

Thank you for sharing! This is the most comprehensive and practical review I've seen on sigma lens. Helped me a lot.

[@jamesstratford6282]

Excellent comparison. So many of these videos have irritations but this was balanced, methodical and free from gimmicks. Very useful.

[@bboyknight252]

IMHO great review in such LONG time! You have earned a subscriber there friend. Keep up the good work! Maybe review the canon and sigma 70-200 so?

[@AmbercoolPhotography]

These comparison videos are pretty amazing! How do we get you to do more??

[@MatthewGore]

I'm actually working on more... it's just been a busy year! Expect another one this month.

[@eddie4367]

Very good review. Good information made clear and concise. Subscribed.

[@tylerjones8280]

The sigma's bokeh is smoother and has less chromatic aberration wide open than the canon. Look back 9:43 - 9:55 , the cupcake and the bokeh ball in the canon's example has an irregular greenish outline. The sigma is truly superior in every aspect than the overpriced canon.

[@lordello]

subscribed a couple videos ago... nice video and honest comparison... cheers from Brazil...

[@twoblink]

By far the best comparison video I've seen. The somewhat monotone voice helped vs most canon fan boys who yelled and screamed about a canon and then poopoos over other lenses. This was as objective in my mind as it got. That said, Canon fanboys will still buy the L lens, because it's not about the images to them, it's about the red ring... So... Those of you who buy a sigma, here's a tip, buy a sigma and put a red rubber band on your lens. There you go. Great job on the video, look forward to others.

[@jamesbell3128]

The Images at 5:00 are two different shots..? The canon photo does not have plane in it & the clouds seem to be lower in the show.. Where the Simga has a plane (top right) and thew clouds are higher up in the shot. Is this just me? Or do other people see this.

[@MatthewGore]

Hi James. Its not just you.

[@caesarcubillan9959]

Nicely done the review , very concrete not much talking and straight to the pictures , im gonna see you now on!

[@hethuhamisaranapala7895]

Your reviews are brilliant mate. Accurate, no BS, unbiased... can rely upon. very well done! It would be very helpful if you could get a chance to review the latest Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 G2.

[@MatthewGore]

Thanks! The new Tamron G2 is on my list... but I'm having trouble finding time to make these videos. Hopefully by this summer.

[@Wiglefish]

Just got my sigma yesterday and love it. Can't agree more with this review. The Canon is a solid lens but it's just too old to keep up with the sigma. And it's crazy overpriced simply because it's canon. Nothing new there :)

[@Bobbymcduff42]

Heard about this lens and now you have convinced me that is the way to go...thanks

[@iozzyi]

The AF Tracking not tracking fast enough when something is moving fast towards you is pretty normal.. to get around it, I do shorter bursts consecutively i.e. burst, let go for a split second, then burst again. It seems to work better. My camera is limited to 7fps, but I'm guessing a camera with 14fps shooting would do a bit better since it's not lagging. I also notice my camera lags more when I'm doing a really long burst (20+) and then the AF tracking degrades more... it also gets worse when my card is nearly full (I have a 64GB 95MB/s) as the card writes slower. So you can do things to help it.

[@dominiccole]

amazing review! I was very impressed of the amount of work that you put in this review. I am not used to reviews that professional on yt. I'll just sub :)

[@iios]

Really nicely put together.

[@StillFingers]

A good review/comparison. Just remember the Canon was released in 1998, the Sigma in 2012, lens design has come a long way in 14yrs. Many are waiting for a Mark II update, hoping it is as dramatic of an update like the 24mm f1.4 Mark II was. The Sigma look stunning, visually and IQ wise, the price is fantastic!

[@rangerpretzel]

I was wondering if/when you'd continue making new videos. Love this new video. (Already have the 35mm f/2.0 IS, so I'm all set, but interesting comparison. Excited to see your follow-up video with the Sigma 35mm f/1.4)

[@MatthewGore]

Sounds like you may have already seen my recent Tamron 35mm vs Canon f/2 video, but the Tamron vs Sigma video is on the way. Probably will publish it on Monday, if not sooner.

[@tobiesther4063]

Your video was educative and not bias. Good job

[@BarnET0]

Great review, Very clear and not too complicated

[@binaryblog]

It feels strange and exiting to watch reviews there Sigma beats much more expensive Canon and Nikon lenses. The whole Art series is extremely good and I'm very happy to see it soon on Sony FE cameras :P Great review btw :D

[@makmunwhai1851]

Your video sure cleared many of my enquires. I'm definitely going for Sigma... Thank you

[@5pu7nik]

Why no mention of massive auto focusing problems on sigmas side?

[@MatthewGore]

Of course, the answer there is that I didn't have any focusing problems. I understand that some people say they have them, but I can only assume that it's a problem that crops up with particular cameras with the lens, or with certain samples of the lens. I had no problems, so I can't report any.

[@enginylmaz7472]

It's a very good job I like this comparison.keep up the works like that...

[@brandoncordy733]

I just bought the sigma. I’m so excited!

[@MatthewGore]

Nice! Hard not to be excited about a new lens like this ART series

[@skyknight6]

Nice review Matt.

[@DanteBellin]

Very well explained and comapred. Thank you. btw, you got a really pleasant voice. Thumb up

[@summit505]

Beautiful Job mate. Keep up the great work!! As for lens review suggestions I would love to see the Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD vs EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM.

[@RonnieChan]

Hi Matthew, I have a question pertaining the colour.I test both lens myself with 5dmark 3 and I find the sigma has cooler colour while canon version is warmer and more vibrant. However,I see your image comparison looks very similar.How you do it?

[@MatthewGore]

Hi Ronnie, I don't find there to be any significant color differences. I shoot RAW, and when I set them to the same color temperature for comparison, they look virtually identical. More importantly, when I'm doing color critical work, I use a color checker ( goo.gl/GJkK52 ) and create a custom profile for each lens so that the colors always come out as accurate as possible, and I've never had a problem.

[@MrABblackriver]

How did you set up your focus for shooting sharp skateboard pictures ?

[@marcosaracco663]

I liked the review but I really can't understand something...What's the point to do this kind of tests on a landscape photo???? I think it doesn't make sense at all :/ Expecially when you test the wide apertures, what's the sense of analyzing sharpness and contrast in the corner, which I'm sure are not on the focus plane? This makes confusion between the "softness" due to the out of focus area and the effective loss of sharpness at the corners! If you use those lenses at wide apertures you'd probably never shoot landscape photos but you'll have a main subject and a blurry background, and in this case the sharpness in the corners is not so important. For lower apertures you test makes more sense intstead

[@diegogin4871]

The best review i ever seen, thanks so much. I will choose Sigma with no doubt! a monster lens!

[@jesseking4201]

great in-depth video, real helpful, thanks

[@MatthewGore]

Glad you fount it helpful, Jesse :-)

[@Bongo2k]

When Canon gives you lemons....

[@MotoFotoe]

Buy SIGMA! :-p

[@wjfmarketing]

Hell Matthew, Love your reviews... I hope this helps cover a little of your expenses in the future for more reviews. Thanks, B. Fisher

[@MatthewGore]

Thank you! It most certainly will :-) This is the first support I've had in the last few months, so it's a big help.

[@MatthewGore]

It takes a while for these sorts of things to show up in my "fan funding" dashboard, so I only just saw the details... so I thought I'd take the opportunity to thank you again!

[@tamasvarga67]

Super review! It would be great to see the same with the 24 1.4 L vs Art.

[@RicardoBicalhoAndrade]

Nice comparasion dude, gratz

[@topcow23]

Great straight to the point review. TY for the video.

[@paulp3053]

awesome review, very objective but pleasant to watch, thanks!

[@bjmoose1]

I really enjoy your lens comparisons! Chocked full of very useful information, and I learned a fair bit as well. Please do more!! Simply superb!

[@YourTechGuide.]

I bought this lens because of this video. tested the lens yesterday on my Canon 70D, and I was amazed how it shot outdoor. tested it out during low light at my friends party and boy! the lens was struggling focusing on my subject. the tone it produces is more on the warmer side compare to cooler image from the Canon 50mm f/1.8. For some weird reason the Canon 50mm f/1.8 images are way sharper that this lens. I tried to like this lens but the focusing is driving me nuts during low light. I will be returning this lens tomorrow. very disappointed. maybe my lens is defective?

[@MatthewGore]

L BS Hmm... that's interesting. I don't really shoot much video, and rarely use autofocus for it, so I can't say whether this is typical for the lens, or whether you just happened to be in a situation that your camera struggled with. It is very surprising to hear that the 50 1.8 is sharper... that just shouldn't be the case, so perhaps it is defective. It's also possible that it requires calibration. If you get a new one, I'd be interested to hear you results.

[@YourTechGuide.]

+Matthew Gore I'm not talking about using it as a video. I'm talking about image quality and focus. the focus was so inconsistent shooting indoor. it was pretty much a shoot or miss deal with me during my friends partay. I couldn't even upload it to show the the picture cause of the image quality is not even as good as the 50mm 1.8

[@MatthewGore]

L BS Got it. Just reread your post... not sure why I thought you were shooting video :) Anyway, it certainly sounds like there's something wrong with your lens; it should be significantly sharper than the 50 1.8, and I can at least say that I didn't have any trouble focusing with it in low light with the 5D III, though I didn't test it with an APS-C camera.

[@nagol5178]

Matthew Gore I wouldn't be so sure. I am surprised as well, but my Canon 50mm 1.8 STM is incredibly sharp. So much so that it doesn't seem possible. At 2.8 the Canon 50mm is sharper than most L primes at F/3.2. I am not sure what they do to cause the 50mm to be pretty much perfect in a cheap case. I am testing via a full frame as well. It has become apparent to me that the L series zooms are worth it, but the L series primes do not seem worth it. Neither do the more expensive sigmas over the regular Canon USM primes. Except for durability of course. A good example of this, look at the 100mm F/2 USM, the 500 dollar one. Then look at the 100mm F/2.8. I've owned both. You can even compare the 135mm F/2L to the 100mm F/2. I would give the L series the win on the 135mm, but it's not by as much as I think people would assume. I am starting to realize that the L series is more about build quality, sometimes you get more sharpness, sometimes you don't. When you do, it's not as much as one would think. Canon somehow has done really well with their non L series USM primes. It's hard to justify the L series primes if one doesn't need weather sealing and build quality. The only L series lenses I would get at this point would be the 24-70 2.8 and the 135 F/2. I don't shoot longer than 135 so I can't comment on that. Any prime under 135 I would just get the Canon USM one.

[@ThienVNguyen]

I shot with both sigma and canon copies for weddings . I have to say that sigma 35mm does struggle focusing in low light. It has slight hesitation before locking in the focus. The canon version locks in subjects much better in low light settings

[@capfever]

Your test is absolutely briliant! just ned to se it once and then i know fore shure what Im going to by! Thank you!

[@EmmanuelJeanbart]

How you get to different aperture when both lenses are fix 1.4 ?

[@MatthewGore]

Hello, The answer there is that the lenses are not fixed at f/1.4. F/1.4 is their maximum aperture available, but not the only aperture available. When you see a lens like a 24-70 f/2.8, people may say that it has a fixed f/2.8 aperture, but what they mean is that it has an f/2.8 aperture available across the entire zoom range... unlike a lens like the 55-250 f/3.5-5.6, where the f/3.5 is only available at the 55mm end of the zoom range, but when you zoom it out to 200mm, only f/5.6 will be available as the maximum aperture.... it's not fixed. Hope that helps.

[@EmmanuelJeanbart]

Matthew Gore Thank u for responding and yes I know but I thought the 35mm 1.4 were prime lenses not zoom lens!

[@MatthewGore]

Yes, they are prime lenses, which so the f/1.4 is available all the time. But it's AVAILABLE the whole time, not fixed. The focal length is fixed (35mm)... that's what makes it prime. The 1.4 is always AVAILABLE as part of the aperture range, but you can always set it to f/2.8 or f/16 , etc. With some zoom lenses, the largest aperture at the near end of the zoom range is NOT available at the other end of the zoom range (so the aperture range is variable, not fixed).

[@EmmanuelJeanbart]

Matthew Gore ok ok you’re right, what am I thinking 🤦🏾‍♂️ but thanks again! Very good and helpful channel. So I’m getting the sigma lol

[@KingCast65]

I have the baby Sigma. My go-to lenses are the baby Sigma and a Zeiss 45mm 2.8 pancake, which is still head and shoulders above the Sigma in terms of richness whenever I can use it but the Sigma is amazing compared to the price point of the Canon right --- just make sure you have it dialed in perfectly because the focus can be a real mother. Don't know if I need to calibrate it or just be more careful.

[@robinsantoso1687]

Hi dude, woooow this is verrryyyy awesome video comparison & review. None can achieve this, even closely. Keep up good work

[@tyzenityz]

Thanks!

[@JessieYoung]

I currently own the Sigma 30mm 1.4 (yes 30mm, not 35mm).. It's a very nice lens but I want to know the difference between this 30mm and the Sigma 35mm 1.4. the 30 is about $500 and the 35 is almost $900 new. I've asked a couple people and one said theirs major vignetting and not as sharp as focus. I wish there was a video like this comparing the two but I'll probably end up switching to the 35 soon regardless.

[@Loki-c-z6r]

30mm is made for APS-C sensors and 35mm is for full frame. 35mm can be used for APS-C as well.

[@andreibaramidze172]

wow, really great comparison! thanks for the video!

[@djjorge87]

Great review from a great photographer! Subscribed can't wait to see more! Do the 50mm art and 85mm 1.4 DG? If you have not already.

[@applejuicekate]

You're rad! Thank you very much for your thorough comparison!

[@Mr767267]

Excellent review...i would have loved to see low light performance for both. Thanks