Lens Comparison: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART vs Canon 50mm f/1.2L (fixed)

[@nathanmallon6708]

The comparisons you do are by far the most helpful/informative side by sides I've seen. No gimmicks, no BS, just informative and very easy to watch/listen to. Thanks mate! Am picking up the Sigma 50mm Art second hand, so help you out by buying through affiliate link so dropped you a few $$ via the support link. Appreciate you work!

[@MatthewGore]

Thanks Nathan :-)

[@AllgoodthingsTv]

This was an exceptionally good comparison/review, and I say that having watched all of the major KZbin photography channels. You even made the resolution and focus analysis technically engaging without a test chart with all those patterns on it. That Sigma ART lens is a winner.

[@ienjoicomics101]

bro this is how you do a review. You killed this shit man, appreciate the time you spent on this!

[@PatricPuola]

I'm somewhat new to photography but I've watched a lot of product reviews and comparisons. This should be a textbook example on how to do a short, concise and very informative review. A joy to watch.

[@ohworldgirl]

The most comprehensive, straightforward and sensibly conscise video comparison on these two lenses out of the other five vids I've seen. Nice job. Thanks.

[@michaelgong214]

This is the best lens reviewer I ever seen! So informative!

[@JBanchiere]

Him and Christopher Frost are my favorites.

[@tomrose2086]

Superb. No annoying talking heads or funny mannerisms, hairstyles, T-shirts. No showing off the expensive studio and it equipment, no name-dropping, no poorly disguised allusions to how great and successful you are. No bias to any brand (i.e. no fanboyism!). Just good, useful information, presented in a clear and interesting way. And although the Sigma lens seems to be the winner on most of the things tested we can still decide in favour of the Canon (lighter, weather sealed) when what we want most is a beautifully blurred background and maximum subject-separation. For landscapes and cityscapes, we can use a slower (and cheaper!) lens that is better corrected at smaller apertures but that would be necessary only if it made any difference at the sizes we print or display.

[@garyyarber6711]

Your review was spectacular. Most camera reviewers read spec sheets and press releases or discuss strengths and weaknesses without concrete real world examples. Your video is extremely professional and well produced and I learned something having watched it. Thanks for taking the time to create valuable and stimulating content. Being a Nikon user, I would like to see you use your abilities to talk about what you see as the advantages and disadvantages of the Sony, Canon, and Nikon systems as well as the mirrorless Olympus and Fujifilm offerings.

[@Zwiesel66]

Your comparison of image sharpness and quality is very nice and clear. I really appreciate that. Great video.

[@itsmoneytoday]

Great review. You have quite the presentation. I have a Sigma 1.8 which I love. Thinking of selling the Canon lenses I have and get this the 1.4 I appreciate your efforts here!

[@antraxxslingshots]

Good Comparison, thank you very much. My thoughs as i own the 85mm 1.2 and use it 85% of the time, at least: - Noise: doesn´t matter - Resolution: my 85mm 1.2 is cristal clear in the center, anything else doesn´t matter. Maybe i was just lucky. If you spend the extra buck because of 1.2 instead of 1.4 you (should) use it at 1.2 nearly all the time...if you use it at 1.4 mostly you bought the wrong lens. - Sealing: Matters! - Weight: Doensn´t matter - Vignette: lol i even like that, i add more in post - bad borders: doesn´t matter, this is no landscape or architecture Lense after all...and if you want to use it for that Stop 8 and Tripod are mandatory anyway. For my style it even helps if the center is the most importend section. - Bokeh: Next to sharp center the most important point. - Price: Does matter!

[@carthik86]

Best lens review I have ever watched, technical and evidence based. I usually don't comment on videos but had to let you know. Cheers,

[@davidsovereign4958]

This is the cream of reviews Matt. Thank you for not wasting our time. Subscribed for that fact alone! One question - in the later comparisons, you’ve listed both sides as Canon. Was that in error? You have Canon 50mm f/1.4 on the left and Canon 50mm f/1.2L on the right. Just curious. Thanks again for a STELLAR video. - David

[@MatthewGore]

Hey David, Glad you liked it :-) Yes, this video was my first attempt at using chunks of previous videos as templates to speed up production, and it led to all sorts of errors like that. I fixed some of them and re-published the video (which is where the (fixed) part of the title came from, but I didn't catch everything. Back when this was published, KZbin had a feature that allowed me to overlay the correct camera names, so I didn't need to upload a new copy, but that feature has since been disabled. Oh well :-) You probably got the general idea.

[@davidsovereign4958]

Matthew Gore - Thanks for answering back so quickly:) Yup, got the idea right away! I’m sold either way. Please keep the content coming if you can. Between you and Mark Bone, I’ll be up and running in no time. Thanks again Matt!✨

[@DarkstarDarth]

My R6 and the canon 50mm 1.2 L really gives unique pics. The bokeh is legendary.

[@MatthewGore]

It's an awesome lens for bokeh, no doubt about that, and it's actually better on mirrorless, IMHO, since the direct focusing is more reliable with that shallow depth of field.

[@BabakAzarian]

ive watched a looot of lens/camera reviews but this was so far the best, in depth, on point review ive ever watched

[@douglauson]

Great review - I'm looking seriously at the Sigma (my first non-Canon L lens), so I was a little concerned, but your review clearly shows that the Sigma is better.

[@kaanaksoy2599]

Matthew, your comparison is flawless! It is just another perfect review of yours. Thanks a lot.

[@channelforadifferentrecome6635]

Wow! it's 9 years later and you blow most lens review channels out of the water. This was a breath of fresh air, most lens reviews are just weekend cheer leaders for what ever lens they found on ebay recently that they can write a review about. I swear you could put a trash kit lens from the 2010 in front of them and they would celebrate it and pull buzz words out their ass like film-like and "it has character".

[@njekin]

Another problem many review forgot to mention, sigma is actually darker than canon at the same aperture ISO shutter speed, about 2/3 stops maybe. Probably due to its lens coating.

[@JBanchiere]

Dxomark shows Sigma transmission at 1.8 and canon at 1.5

[@hmshs9683]

This is one of the best lens reviews i've ever seen. I am a Sigma fan. I am now glad to see that Sigma beats Canon with most of the conditions and specs including much less price. I just discovered your channel but i will also watch other reviews in a short while. I can simply say i will recommend this review to all my friends who are insisting Canon is much more better than Sigma. I use sigma 35mm 1.4 art and 35mm is incredible lens for weddings, landscape or Daily Street photography. Once again thanks for this helpful review.

[@GravityHazard]

You forgot to mention the main selling point of the cannon at least for me : Weather Sealing

[@kailuasurfing]

Due to videos like these, you are my go to guy for lens comparisons. Thanks for this!

[@MatthewGore]

Thanks, John, glad you find them useful!

[@johnnypopstar]

This was bloody brilliant. Have been trying to find a replacement for my nifty fifty 1.8, because it's softer than the results of a particularly spicy curry, and the detail you go in to has helped convince me (after my own in-store test shots with it too, versus Canon's ~£300 1.4) that the Sigma is definitely a good deal at the price it's at now. Thanks for being so thorough!

[@Just4jeannette]

Same!

[@elijahmant2855]

Hey, Matthew. Nicely put together and presented video. Thanks, Man

[@hudsoncaceres6820]

The age of watching reviews that absolutely suck has ended. Thank you for this review, it definitely determined what I am going to purchase.

[@tonyren6897]

Thanks buddy. Really detailed comparison. Couldn't wait to see your next 1635IS review.

[@jhs9257]

The best comparison I have ever seen on these two lenses.

[@DariarVisuals]

Seriously the best review I've ever seen. I wish all reviews were this good

[@marknongkhlaw1674]

Sigma usually have a micro usb port for updating the firmware. Not sure if this has, but that's another thing to keep in mind. As far as APSC goes, it has the "holy trinity" with 16mm, 30mm and 56mm, how would the 30mm compare with the nifty fifty? Thanks for the very scientific and methodical review

[@Pentographer]

Your reviews are better than some of FStoppers. Great work!

[@MatthewGore]

Thanks!

[@danmatthewmanphotography6919]

Thanks for this excellent and detailed review. I like your systematic approach the review, a good pace to the commentary and clear crisp graphics on screen. The only thing I would change would be to see the vignetting examples individually rather than both at once, it's hard to focus on the detail on the two screens. This video is the best lens comparison of these two lenses I have seen. Thanks again!

[@LOLA789DANCE]

Matthew, thanks for your review again I was thinking to get the canon 50mm f 1.2.....until i watch this now....Should i go for Sigma? Great video. Plus the Sigma is about $400 cheaper? Thanks!

[@MatthewGore]

+LOLA'S STUDIO Unless you really don't like the bokeh on the Sigma (some people don't, I guess), I'd go with the Sigma. It's very sharp, and the AF is pretty fast and reliable. Not much wrong with it, except that it's big and heavy for a 50mm lens.

[@LOLA789DANCE]

+Matthew Gore I like the bokeh on the Sigma more hahaha and yes most pix from the Sigma lens are sharper than the Canon....But yes it is bigger and heavier.......but that is $400 diff....Thanks again for your quick response.

[@craigmazzali]

I have owned the canon 50mm 1.2 and i would say definitely go with the sigma!

[@ЭаоуиПРайм]

i have and sigma and canon on sony a7sll ///sigma good for contrast image/not for art/// bokeh is absent/////canon is art.and best for me

[@galactic_kiwi]

Clipped bokeh circles and onion rings are not exactly attractive in terms of bokeh so I'd take the Sigma over the Canon 1.2 any day. There's also no point having soft backgrounds if nothing is particularly sharp in the photo, which seems to be the case with the Canon lens.

[@sujitmohanty2850]

Very nice comparison. Really appreciate. But a lot of people use 50mm for indoor portraits where the sharpness matters in the subject area only. It would have been great to see some indoor portraits comparison. But thanks a lot for the nice comparison.

[@otoburkaplan]

Wouv... No shitting around, just pure necessary info.. Congrats man.... What a good review...

[@entertayne]

thank you, this is the best sigma 50 1.4 art review video on youtube

[@uptownphotography]

I have been enjoying the Sigma 50mm quite a bit and the quality is great, but recently I noticed on my shoot at an event something worth mentioned. I'm not sure if there's something I am overlooking and maybe you might have a suggestion or idea. I was using my Canon 5D4 w/24-105mm lens and had the Sigma ART on my 5D3 (both with UV filters). When I aimed the Sigma in the direction of the windows (it was a mid afternoon event) the whole image in my viewfinder had a noticeable haze...When I did the same thing with the Canon lens the haze was not present, except where the windows were located. I tried removing the UV filter, which was a Tiffen included with the Lens, and it still looked the same. I thought the free filter included might be the problem as it was a low end Tiffen filter they included with the sale of the lens. The Sigma lens looks great normally on all my shoots, but it seems strange it would exhibit this much haze when facing towards the windows. Have you heard of any similar stories with haze. Thanks........

[@MatthewGore]

The "haze" that you mention is "flare", and more specifically, it's a type called "veiling flare". There's always a bigger danger of getting flare if you use a UV filter on your lens, so I recommend never using them, and it's also usually significantly reduced by using your lens hood (which also protects the front element from fingerprints and damage). Large aperture lenses like the Sigma are often more susceptible to flare (especially if the hood is not used); that's normal and to be expected... they're designed to gather a lot of light. The lens hood is part of the lens design that reduces flare, so always use it. Of course, it's also really important to keep your optics clean. If the front element is dusty or oily, that will catch and diffuse light, and cause flare. Anyway, there's not much else I can suggest. Use the hood. No UV filters. Keep it clean. I've never had any particular problems with flare on the Sigma lenses, so you're probably looking at normal behavior for an f/1.4 lens.... but it would be interesting to see how they compare to other models. I'll keep that in mind when I'm doing future reviews.

[@patpathinayake3586]

Hi, Matthew, Brilliant, succinct and clear technical data encompassing unbiased opinions. Thank you so much. As a favour, would you be able to do a Video on a Sigma 150mm-600mm Sports lens to be fine tuned by using a Sigma doc? This process uses Free Sigma firmware and it is tedious and long drawn one. The clips I watched relating to this process, do not cover much and not clear. Many thanks.

[@MahoSelfi]

I can't tank you enough for making such a perfect video

[@aaronwalker4202]

Great comparison video, I own the Sigma and gave my nifty fifty away. Sigma 50 is an amazing lens but is heavy as you pointed out. Thought about changing to a larger 1.2 aperture but this video has convinced me to continue bearing the weight. Sigma garners quite a few compliments on it’s appearance and the magazine quality photos. They can make an everyday pic look like a professional photoshoot product.

[@joshlobel8111]

just purchased the Sigma 50mm, thanks for the great review!

[@MatthewGore]

Hey Josh, glad you found it useful :-) Enjoy the new lens!

[@davidecapri]

I have the sigma since three years and used it for a lot of jobs, extremely sharp lens, but it's too heavy (I use 50mm as my main lens for 95% of my pictures) and often has an unimpressive rendering, lacks a lot of pop and micro contrast. It's an old lens and everything but I find the Canon 50mm 1.2 to have a lot more character and microcontrast, I'm going to switch between the two. Then, if your main purpose is shooting landscapes wide open ok maybe sigma is a better choice, but for portraiture (and shooting people in general) there's no competition between the two. And, sigma 50mm is often inconsistent in focusing, at least my copy but I read that it's a really common issue, more likely than not.

[@GuysandGirlsMag]

Fantastic Videos, just subscribed. It would be fantastic if you could do a comparison between the 70-200mm and the Sigma 1.4 Art Lens ( as I'm a portrait photographer ) trying to find the best sharpness and bokeh, unless you already have your opinion on suggested lenses? Robin.

[@NicolasJaraFilmmaker]

At 8:45, the section of the video when zooming into the details of the Bokeh, the picture titles switch. I was wondering if you could clarify and confirm which one is canon and which one is sigma because they switch midway through the explanation?

[@MatthewGore]

The labels switched accidentally... the lenses stay on the same sides throughout each segment. There used to be an overlay that corrected the labels, but KZbin disabled that feature.

[@TMgarage540]

Great review Matthew! Looks like no reason to pay more for red rings! But what do you think about front/back phocus on Sigma lens? Did you have such problems or Sigma catch right phocus exactly the same as Canon? thank you!

[@jameswang1605]

u just got a new subscriber! best comparison video I have watched

[@MatthewGore]

Thanks James! It was a fun one to make :-)

[@TheWarriorSolution]

You just saved me hundreds of dollars!!! Thanks for putting so much time and effort into your reviews, they really help make it very clear that "L" might just stand for "Loser"

[@melodychest9020]

Awesome review! Is it any surprise that the bokeh on the Canon is better?! The Canon was a step ahead in the blur department to start with!!!

[@joeblow9931]

would love to see a comparison done of the art vs voigtlander 58mm nokton

[@DecvsJapan]

So glad you included night shots mate.

[@uptownphotography]

It sound's like, in your opinion, the Sigma would be a better choice for shooting weddings. I am thinking of buying it for engagements shoots and weddings....My main concern is a lot of photographers I have asked say there are focus issues with Sigma lenses, but I believe they are voicing their opinions on older Sigma performance with focus issues and not the newer ART series lenses. Any thoughts.

[@MatthewGore]

Between these two lenses, the Sigma was much more reliable for me, when it came to focus, though I have heard plenty of people complain about the ART lens. There are probably some camera/lens combinations that will need some adjustments, but I suspect a lot of it comes from people who are new to large aperture primes... getting accurate, tack-sharp focus with such a shallow depth of field is always going to be hard when you're learning how to use them. I have not experienced the focus problems that I've heard about. For what it's worth, I've been using the Sigma ART lenses on Sony mirrorless cameras recently, and they focus is awesome... but that will be an advantage of any mirrorless system.

[@uptownphotography]

@@MatthewGore Thanks for the insight. I would be using the 50mm Sigma on a Canon 5D4 mostly....I have a 5D3 also which it could also be used with....Thanks....

[@RyanHicks]

Really phenomenal work on this review. Continue on with this format, please.

[@DionSiswadi]

Great quality content. Im looking forward you doing comparison between Canon 85mm 1.4L IS and Sigma 85mm Art 1.4.

[@photogenic2010]

Yep.. most useful, perhaps extending the sigma tests using M43 (gh5) for filming (popular in many countries) both native and ef via adapter. That would be a unique presentation. Thanks for a very comprehensive (and surprising ) result.

[@tinathelenphotography7889]

thank you for a very informative and precise review of these two lenses!

[@RollingShutter]

very well done comparison.. I was already set on the Sigma, but the high weight and large formfactor kinda throw me off.

[@NakeanWickliff]

You do a fantastic job sir! Thank you for sharing! I've been on the hunt for a good 50mm going from Canon's 1.2 to the 1.4 for faster focus, then the Tamron 45mm and I'm getting my 1.8 fixed this week. I think I might have to try out the Sigma. Every photog needs a good, reliable 50!

[@NakeanWickliff]

Oh and I'm from Seattle as well! www.nakean.com

[@HarvVideoAudioStuff]

Really great video, seriously man.. fantastic

[@babalyma]

Nice review but weather sealing forgotten (pros for cannon)

[@TeamAPS]

Excellent comparison! Very informative and well-produced. Earned a subscriber in me! :)

[@bala1000mina]

Thank you so much Matthew for the helpful and informative comparison video! God bless, good luck and keep creating!

[@kairinaminemix]

the reviews you do keeps everything real and authentic to the lenses!

[@uptownphotography]

In your opinion, would the Sigma would be better for weddings where many times you don;t get a second chance at getting a shot? Your reviews are always very detailed....Kudos...................................................................Philip

[@MatthewGore]

Hi Philip. My general opinion is that you shouldn't shoot any of the crucial moments of a wedding with a wide aperture prime, at least not set at its widest aperture. It may be fine if you're at a distance (in which case it's easier to nail focus), but otherwise, the depth of field is just too shallow for me... I'd rather get a little more in focus for these shots and be safer if focus is on the nose instead of an eye, etc. I tend to shoot with f/2.8 lenses for that sort of thing... but that's a matter of taste. That said, if I had to choose between these two lenses, I'd stick with the Sigma; for me, it was much more reliable than the Canon (and it's even better on Sony).

[@uptownphotography]

@@MatthewGore Hi Matthew. I agree with you with the depth of field issue at a wedding for crucial moments like the vows, rings, first kiss, etc. I actually use my 24-105mm f/4 lens for all those moments and really looking for a fast prime for things like the bride's house, the park and engagement shoots, etc. On another note, I have watched many of your reviews and you do a stellar job. They're all really well done. I was hoping the Sigma ART 24-70mm 2.8 was more of a good choice to replace my 24-105mm, but a little scary the way it was missing focus, but then again that was with really fast movement on a basketball court, so it may be fine for weddings where nobody is moving that fast. I am still trying to make my mind up on that lens to use with a Canon 5D4. I think I may buy the Sigma 50mm ART however once wedding season starts here in NJ... (soon). Thanks..............................................................................Philip

[@siddraj2002]

Great videos! Can you please make a video for the Sigma 24-105 Art f4, also, possibly on nikon bodies or compared to a Nikon lens, since I'm a Nikon guy.

[@rombcorp86]

hi Matt, waiting for rewiev of Tamron 15-30

[@captainkuijt]

I was torn between one or the other, but I was sold on the Sigma right when I saw the sharpness results. I don't mind the extra weight so much, I always have battery grip on my 6D to counter it becoming front-heavy with heavier lenses anyway. Cheers mate!

[@beautybydamaris1]

Please tell me in comparison which lends is better between a Cannon 50mm 1.4 or a Sigma 50mm 1.4 Art? I need to know to decode which one between the two to go with? I use it for filming videos. Thanks

[@MatthewGore]

BeautyByDamaris The Sigma is definitely the better lens, although it is heavier and larger.

[@beautybydamaris1]

Thank you so much Matthew Gore for answering my question. Subscribed to your channel

[@arson114]

Thanks for the great reviews Matthew! I was about to get this used Sigma 50mm and a speedbooster to use on a Canon M50 for street and low light photography when I had another idea... I could save some money and perhaps get better quality with the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 DC HSM ART and NO speedbooster and get the about the same focal length. I don't know if you have any experience with that Sigma 30mm but what do you think? Thanks again!

[@MatthewGore]

That's a really interesting question, and I'm afraid that I don't have enough experience with the 30mm to really be able to offer much help, and I have even less experience with the metabones speedboosters. Of course, the 30mm f/1.4 art will cost a lot less than the 50 + a speedbooster, and you'll generally get better autofocus performance without an adapter. But I don't know how the resolution will compare, and you'll get an extra f-stop of light or so with the speedbooster... so it's just a matter of whether you really want that extra light. Sorry I can't be of more help!

[@artiest5]

You should do more of these. It would be great for us more low budgeters, if you explore some of the Vintage Lens's. I'm really interested in purchasing an Olympus 50mm 1.4 lens but a review like this would help a lot

[@MatthewGore]

Hi Vincent, I'd love to do more of these... they just take a long time to make, and since I don't really make any money from them, it's hard to justify spending all of the time :-) I am making more, though... just generally have to stick with more popular lenses. I'll see about starting a Patreon page or something, maybe I can expand a bit.

[@artiest5]

Matthew Gore I understand.

[@andreybessolitsyn2055]

Now, in 2021, Canon 50mm 1.2 focuses just great with R-cameras! And its picture is better to my eyes.

[@markharris5771]

Brilliant video with plenty of examples, thank you. Although I don't think you mentioned it I think the Sigma also had better colours. Time and time again 3rd part lenses seem to outdo the Canon version.

[@raksh9]

Years ago, I bought a 50/1.2 but it had bad backfocusing problems. The shop went through another three and they all misfocused, so I got a 35L instead. The new EOS R and R5/6 will give those backfocusing EF lenses new life.

[@pvp31976]

Matthew thank you so very much for an excellent review! I came here looking to compare the 50mm f1.4 for Canon and Sigma but found your video, watched it and my mind is made up! Thanks! I am a newbie and just wondered if you could give me some advice... I would like to do fashion shots, portraits and because I am an interior designer, I would like to shoot the Interiors/ room spaces I style and design. Will I be ok to start with the Sigma 50mm f1.4 and do all the types of pictures I want to do or will I need another lens? I would love to hear your thoughts! Thanks heaps in advance, for answering.

[@MatthewGore]

+Petrina Sarkar Fashion photography can be pretty flexible, so the 50mm should work for some of that, especially if you shoot with an APS-C camera, although many people prefer a longer focal length for portraits (85-200mm). For interior work, you're going to find it very hard to frame your photos. On full frame cameras, a 24mm lens is really a good idea, or even wider. A 16-35mm would work well, or some people are satisfied with something like the Sigma 24-35. If you're shooting APS-C, a wider zoom would make more sense: the 18-35 f/1.8 would be great, but any lens in that range would be just fine, since you'll want to shoot from a tripod and stop it down quite a bit anyway. That said, the 50mm will be wonderful for taking detail shots.

[@pvp31976]

+Matthew Gore Thanks heaps Matthew!

[@maskirovka77]

thanks for posting this: I had been mulling buying the Canon 50mm F1.2 for dance photography, but I think I will be taking a serious look at the Sigma 50mm F1.4.

[@faisaliq4u]

Dear Mathew, would you please someday review the Canon 135mm f2 Lens? Great videos! way better than most people out there..

[@mbvideos4448]

Found your channel through /r/photography. Fantastic, to the point, lens comparison/review. Thank you.

[@rickybrin5048]

Hay Matt great review , I am looking to buy a 50mm lens and now I am stuck on the sigma and or the Tamron since the Tamron has VC and weather sealing. What do you recommend. I really would love to hear what you have to say about the Tamron

[@brandonj8018]

tamron has a 45, not 50. :)

[@andreasbrand3191]

nice. thx. I have the superb Sigma 35 1.4 ART, can't see me buying a 50 any time soon. Got the good old/cheap 1.8 but rarely use a 50 prime. Really looking forward to the next review... if you have the chance, you should also look at the Canon 11-24 4.0 which I found to be a stellar performer when I borrowed it for a day. I was in the market for the Tamron 15-35, but I'm not sure anymore. But without earning money with photography anymore, I can't justify the 3k€ :)

[@MatthewGore]

Andreas Brand I'm definitely planning on getting to the 11-14 f/4. It may be next on my list, although I'd like to spend some time shooting with the Canon 400mm f/4L IS II DO first. The Tamron 15-30 f/2.8 is much more reasonably priced around here... about $1200 USD, so it's an attractive option: amzn.to/1S3XiEP

[@andreasbrand3191]

Matthew Gore, sure, the Tamron costs roughly the same in euros here, but the Canon (11-24) is just out of this world performance wise. I always considered 16/17mm to be ultrawide. Then I was envious about the Nikon 14-24 for quite some time but I didn't shoot that much wide angle anymore, not until recently. I went to my good old trusty camera store (they always have everything there!) to check out the Tamron some weeks ago. The Tamron seemed to perform quite nicely but most of my impressions of the Tamron were drowned by the field of view experience I got from the Canon 11-24. When I held the canon, standing in 10m away from a 25m tall building having no problem whatsoever to get it into the frame I was sold. I'll get the lens at one point, used or whatever, but I already know that. But as I said, it's hard to justify such a special lens if it won't pay for itself... at least at the recommended price tag :) The big plus for the Tamron is the 2.8 AND the VR/IS, which performed nicely. Makes it the much more versatile lens imho. I can't comment on the sharpness across the zoom range, something you should consider in future reviews. Many great lenses get quite soft in the middle of their zoom ranges.

[@andreasbrand3191]

The only downside for both these: No filters. ... and I'm a sucker for polarizers with water, other wet surfaces and skies. Foliage in hard light also works really well with the right polarizer. No post processing can replace the removal of hard reflections... and wide angle landscape is the (not just my) primary application for this. Shame!

[@kevincarver4759]

IMPORTANT! The Canon is actually longer than 50 and the Sigma is a true 50. Most big brand 50mm lenses are actually 51.something millimeters because that's just one of those photography things handed down from the past when 50mm lenses weren't precisely 50.

[@ziondarl5830]

learning music video production. i bougth canon 5d mark iii. do i need this lense or canon lense for my video production. like how many lense do i need to start up video production. help please

[@helthuismartin]

Please compare the Sigma with the Zeiss 55mm 1.4 Otus on the same location.

[@ikoknyphausen198]

Thank you. Can you throw in a nifty-fifty into your comparison?

[@shovelrocker7102]

Nice comparison. But i can say about my Sigma 50mm Art that the AF performance while using Canon 5dmk4 is sometimes quite bad, but at f2 you can somewhat overcome the issue. The focus goes from being front to back, even if you happen to have decent amount of light around you, so you pretty much can't adjust it to be accurate. Even though i do like the images you are able to get with the lens, if the plane of focus happens to be where you put it :D

[@njekin]

Looking at the color, sigma appears brown in nearly all the scenes compared to the canon. Canon seem to bring more pink, red feeling to the image. Is this the case?

[@ReggieABrown]

You and Christopher Frost make the best lens review videos!

[@starbase218]

Reggie Brown I actually think Christopher Frost's testing of resolution leaves something to be desired. He takes one frame at a certain focal length and f-stop, and judges both center and corner sharpness from that same image, without refocusing for the corners. So if he tests a lens that has field curvature, that lens may actually be capable of better resolution than his results show.

[@laszu7137]

wrong

[@shang-hsienyang1284]

I wonder how the Sigma holds up against the R mount version of the 50mm f/1.2

[@MatthewGore]

From the weight/size of the R-mount, and the new design (not to mention the price), I'd guess that the Canon will be markedly better. Better for bokeh, anyway, and better in overall resolution, but I don't know if anyone really cares about better resolution in this case :-)

[@kevleverenz]

Respect, this video is all I ever wanted. You keep at it.

[@fredsbloggs656]

Very competent and complete review, well done!

[@lorenzomartin6217]

great information. stuck between these two but i've come closer to a decision thanks to this.

[@Canoneosmiami]

Very informative about the distortion ,very nicely explained !

[@Libinkttm]

Hi buddy Ive bought brand new canon 5d mrk 4 , planning to buy a used 50 1.4 for 500 USD , Ive often heard reviewers saying about caliberation of lenses to canon , especially these 3rd party lenses , otherwise we dont get the autofocus properly . is this true ? should we caliberate the lenses to the body . at the moment ive the 3 L Series lenses 24-70 f2.8 mark ii 24-105 f4 mark ii (kit lens) 100 mm macr all these 3 lenses work perfectly with my 5d mark 4 and also 80 D (Which I Sold to buy mark 4 , 24-105F4 MARK II I got along with mark 4 ) Ive never done any caliberation to any of these lenses having said that , Ive never used any third party lenses, So little worried about autofocussing issues without caliberaing hope you clear my doubt about caliberation .

[@MatthewGore]

As a general rule, micro AF adjustment is not usually necessary. If you're using a large aperture lens and frequently shooting close-up details / portraits and you notice a consistent AF problem (always back focusing or always front focusing slightly) then it's worth making micro focus adjustments. I haven't had to do it any more often with 3rd party lenses than with Canon lenses, but I haven't had to do it very often in either case. It's never necessary if you're using a mirrorless camera or using live-view to focus on your Canon. Calibration is pretty simple, though. There are products to help that cost about $15 on Amazon, but even better, you can get a program like Reikan FoCal that will automate the whole process with supported cameras. If I remember correctly it cost about $60 for the software, and it's worth it... if you have AF problems. It can also test how your lens resolution compares to other samples of the same lens.

[@Libinkttm]

@@MatthewGore thanks for your prompt response ...

[@joserojo6873]

At 4:24 is this a typo or part of the previous week's review of the canon 1.4 vs 1.2? Are those files from the sigma or the 1.4 canon?

[@MatthewGore]

That's a typo. I was re-using some of the template from the previous video and left the text in place accidentally, but the files are all different. It was one of several problems with this video... some of which I fixed, but some I missed, in the "fixed" version :-)

[@madebyitself]

this is so cool! thanks, mate! very useful! couldn't understand if I should buy Sigma, but now the decision is made.

[@soumyapatil2114]

Brilliant take. All plausible doubts answered. Thank you.

[@danncorbit3623]

For a super fast prime, nobody wants to shoot at f8. In fact, if you are at f8, chances are you should be using an ND filter. Their core reason to be is for portraits or other similar concepts where you are isolating the subject at all costs. IMO, YMMV. Of course there are exceptions, but at f8 why choose the Canon f1.2 L over the f1.8 STM? There is no logical reason. On the other hand, the reasons for choosing these lenses over much cheaper options are really art reasons. It is incredibly difficult to measure such things. So we focus on the measurables. But ask Julia Trotti why she loves the Canon f1.2. And she's no dummy. And the usage also comes into play for specialty things like astrophotography where the Sigma atomizes the Canon into lens dust. Having barked and complained and whinged like a petulant child, I still enjoyed your review and found it useful.

[@stevofoo]

All of the reviews are super accurate, will done!!!

[@GodsHermes]

Thanks, Matthew! Good job!

[@midnightbangkok]

Hey man, that was a great review and very helpful. Thanks for helping me decide.

[@MatthewGore]

Glad it was helpful!

[@panyiaxiong82]

wow!!! very nicely done!!! very informative and helpful!

[@ttt087]

The best review of Sigma Art 50 ever .. thank you !

[@lifelimitless1710]

One of the best video on lens comparison. To the point. Thanks.