Sigma 135mm f/1.8 Hands-on with a sweet portrait lens

[@DarrenMiles]

Nice work Toby! Your experience mirrors mine, I do a lot of portraits these days and I''ve actually switched from the 200 mm F/2 and now primarily rely on The Sigma 135 as my workhorse for portraiture. It's awesome!

[@johncampbell335]

For years I used a 100mm Canon macro for portraits. Loved it Now I use a Zeiss 85. Love it too.

[@Eric_Rossi]

Great video man, that lens is so good.

[@Askorbian]

I love my Fuji 56mm 1.2 and also the 23mm 1.4 which is also nice for portraits

[@FrankNazario]

i use a 55-200 3.5 /5.6 Nikon AFS VR ...crank the iso to 800 and focus on distance from subject- subject to background and i am very happy with the results and the fact that i can zoom and recompose.

[@OkwyUgonweze]

A wonderful lens but my preference is still the Nikon 105 f 1.4 e. 135 is restricted to certain kinds of scenarios, 85 is the perfect compromise but the 105 offers the balance between 135 and 85. For outdoors this lens is absolute wonder but portraits ain't only done outdoors.

[@RyanH0809]

Beautiful stuff Toby!! As of late I've been playing with the Rokinon 35 1.2 and 50 1.2 and I've fallen in love. Paired to a Fujifilm X-T2. As a non-professional (afforded the ability to take my time) I've found that I prefer to manually focus for portraits and many other still subjects. I honestly believe my photography has improved from being forced to take an extra hands-on approach with these manual lenses.

[@jensvielmann7662]

It is a great lens, but to specialized for me. My portrait work is mostly at weddings (or events in general). For that I much rather have the flexibility of the 70-200. Apart from maybe a very very few environmental shots, I can shoot an entire wedding with that one lens. And yes I do see that the 135 has obviously a bit better quality (sometimes) but: I would be loosing shots changing lenses; I would have more weight to carry and probably spend more money for a set of primes. And all that knowing that I might see the difference but generally clients will NOT. (They rather ask for an HDR :lol:). But If I ever develop a single shoot/one on one outdoor portrait business, I am sure I ll consider this lens.

[@photorectoby]

I agree with the wedding biz and 70-200, I mentioned this in the video. What I didn't mention in the video is wedding photographers - I have tried the 135 (the Canon, not the Sigma) and found it much more challenging to work with than the 70-200. It is certainly useable and produces beautiful shots but for speeches and general reception, I found the versatility of the 70-200 very hard to beat. For straight up portrait work though - ooh we this 135 is as lovely as they come.

[@flowershaman]

Below are my favorite primes I own Rokinon 135 f2 Nikon 180 f2.8 Ed Nikon 105 f2.5 Tokina 100mm f2.8 Lester a dine 100 mm f2.8 Speed master 85mm f1.2 Nikon 50 mm ais f1.2 Nikon 55mm ais f1.2 Tamron adaptall 300mm f2.8 Tamron 90 mm f2.8 macro Tamron 60mm f2.8 macro I may have a problem...

[@koolkutz7]

Nice video Toby. I love that image shot through the tree branches. That lens looks super sharp.

[@fischek]

thanks for a nice, detailed and down to earth review

[@photorectoby]

Thanks for the nice comment!

[@BigMoe1290]

Awesome video as always Toby, really would love to get my hands on a 135Art myself and try it out.

[@andylaurel]

I wonder if these are compatible with teleconverters? A 189mm f/2.5 or a 270mm f/3.5 would be awesome.

[@photorectoby]

+Andy Seward I have heard they are not compatible. :/

[@lilpo1814]

CV is soooo pretty!

[@nsskog]

I own the A7rII, sigma Mc-11, 35mm art and 135mm art and oddly enough I find the autofocus works well with both lenses. I am wondering if there could be some copy variance considering a bunch of reviewers have reported autofocus problems? I also have only used the 135mm a handful of times but the vast majority of shots were perfectly in focus. It isn't as good as native glass especially when talking about eye autofocus but close enough to work for my portraits. Either way I hope sigma offers improvements through firmware!

[@ricksalgado4928]

I agreed ..I own this lens too and I remember when I first got it and adapted to my MC-11 and sony a7r ii focus was terrible but sigma did a firmware update and voala not perfect but good enough ! surprisingly mine focus well under low light conditions but outside on a bright day seems to struggle at times, after the latest firmware has not been as bad but it still not perfect.. SIGMA needs to keep pushing firmware updates if they keep releasing great glass like this.

[@abiddyer1]

I love love love your channel !!!

[@photorectoby]

Thank you very much!

[@james_studio8065]

Did you use flash on this session?

[@Zhorellski]

Can't wait for the FE mount!

[@MestreMur]

Great tattoo at 2:04... It is sharpie, but I need to compare with Zeiss Batis 135 f/.2.8... Some guy said: Zeiss Batis 135 is ultra fast AF and greatest lens ever! I have to make sure first!

[@photorectoby]

Let me know what you find. I hope to be able to compare those at some point in the future too.

[@seanimal3]

My favorite is the 85mm 1.4 g master

[@photorectoby]

I know - I love that lens and as a Sony shooter that's my easy pick for favorite lens too. I like the longer focal length of this 135 but it's just not working so well on Sony at this time.

[@thatchinaboi]

The 100 or 105mm full frame equivalent focal length is great for portraiture, as long as you are not looking for the most out of focus background possible.

[@tonyturner7676]

Very informative video as always, Toby, but I assume this focal length would be too long for portraits on a crop sensor?

[@photorectoby]

Outside a crop sensor can still work very well with this lens - you are just going to be further back. Though I think you would be best off with an 85 on a crop.

[@pit5000]

How would this work with metabones speedbooster?

[@wanneske1969]

What do you think of the Canon 135 mm f2 ?

[@NOKOT51]

Would consider the negatives to be maybe negligible when using w a Sony body? Thanks great review

[@JacobAlford95]

I have the a6500 with the MC11 - the Sigma 50-100 ƒ1.8 is awesome for portraits. Same type of thing as the 2.8 (nearly identical given the crop factor), albeit a slightly lesser focal range. Tack-sharp, compressed features, silky-smooth background. And very affordable, on my blog I calculated it was 40% of the price of a 70-200 with 70% of the performance; and even more-so given the cheaper body.

[@DmitryBrodsky007]

Jacob what do you think about size and weight of Sigma 50-100 in relationship to A6500 body?

[@JacobAlford95]

It's gigantic - but so is the 18-35, which is the lens I always use. I just plan on always holding the lens for the support. It's cumbersome, but you get used to it. It's really some of the sharpest glass for APS-C, I'm not aware of any alternatives.

[@photorectoby]

The 18-35 and 50-100 are so dang sweet. And I agree for crop users that 50-100 is the better option than the 70-200.

[@stevey500]

Any updates on firmwares to make this lens work better with the MC11? Or maybe does it perform better with a different EF adapter?

[@subirt99]

is not having OS on this lens is a big drawback or can be considered looking at the value the lens provides ?

[@tristanwilhelm9600]

awesome video comparison, thank you very much for this. I think you said it best though when you mentioned if we already have the 70 to 200 Tamron then this lens might not be a good purchase

[@WILMORENO]

Hey, thanks for this review. well done and a great shot. I'm going to sleep on it but I put a 135 sigma in my cart on b&h through your link. Cheers.

[@JapYzawA]

Hi 👋 do you think 135mm is good for beginners?

[@photorectoby]

I think if you have the room it can be a great lens for beginners.

[@guyphoto9437]

Old video,but due to Covid-19 I've had an opportunity to look at some you tube videos. Sigma 135 may be okay, but show me 8x0 and 11x14 prints, not backlit small social media images. I'll stick with my Canon 135mm f/2. I also use a Canon 100mm lens to shoot portraits. It's not the macro its a 100mm USM f/2 lens. Not sure if Canon makes it anymore. I've had it for 18 years of so. I found it on Amazon new and used but not on B&H so that tells me that it's probably not being manufactured anymore. I like it for portraits better than the 85mm, which in my opinion was and is not anywhere close to being an ideal portrait lens and I've been a pro photographer for 40 years. The Canon 135mm, and Canon 70-200 IS 2.8 L, are my go to lenses for outdoor portraiture, in studio I shoot with my 24-135 Canon because it gives me more flexability. I will say I've owned two sigma lenses. Both needed repairs after a year or so and Sigma was good at repairing them, even though one was about a week out of warranty. But it went bad again--got it fixed again and sold it. So, I'm suspect of Sigmas quality--maybe they've improved, I don't know.

[@thomashill5768]

Loved my Canon nifty fifty. 100 bucks, always took great shots...

[@chrisogrady28]

In terms of image rendition: Zeiss 135 > Nikkor 135 DC > Sigma 135 > Canon 135 L

[@Rationalific]

It's definitely a nice lens! The only thing is that I will be getting a Sony mirrorless camera in a few months. (I have an A-Mount SLT, and I don't think this lens is in A-mount, and mine is a crop-sensor camera as well, so it wouldn't work for me anyway.) As I'm not rich and my next purchase will be quite expensive, I'm thinking I might go with the Sony 85mm f/1.8 for portraits... But I do think that the Sigma 135mm f/1.8 gives a creaminess to backgrounds that even beats the 85mm f/1.4 GM, due to its longer focal length, while also beating 200mm f/2.8 lenses. It would be a great, if extremely specialized, lens for Nikon and Canon users.

[@DmitryBrodsky007]

Toby have you shot Sony Zeiss 135 1.8 A mount on LA-EA4 adapter and Sony A7/A9? The SonyZeiss 135 1.8 often can be had at good used prices.

[@photorectoby]

I have not tried the Zeiss 135. I am reluctant to pick up a different adapter for my own use but will look into prices.

[@DmitryBrodsky007]

I see Zeiss 135/1.8 used for $850 on amazon marketplace, and LA-EA4 is like $300 = $1150. Not cheap I know. That Zeiss is sweet though and has 1:4 macro capabilities.

[@885wc]

Hi Toby, I'd like to consider this vs the Nikkor 105 F1. 4 or Sig 105 F1. 4; my current portraits are manual focus Zeiss/Voigtlander and while I love those lenses, not having auto focus just doesn't work for me. Could you please do a video comparing the three lenses or weigh on here with your suggestions? Love the videos btw. Keep em coming!

[@NSAwatchesME]

Why didn't you wait for e mount release

[@photorectoby]

Because I would stilllll be waiting :) I wanted to know the quality and look of the lens. Let's me comment on the lens and the other ones as the FE finally come to market.

[@NSAwatchesME]

PhotoRec TV I'm still waiting too :'(

[@KarenVaisman1]

Wondering if you can update this review w nikon z6 or z7? How does it compare to nikon 105mm 1.4?

[@izgil7541]

I'm using this lens with Z6 and it's fantastic.

[@evo271]

I find it to be to tight as a portrait lens, but an 85mm wide aperture feels more natural.

[@Drogos79]

Is 70-200 at 200mm?

[@flyguy8787]

Have you had your hands on the Sigma 85mm 1.4 yet? I'm curious which one is more dreamy for artistic music video work, this one or that one.

[@Lariofoto]

What about the sigma mc-11 with 35 1.4 ART? Af works well??

[@photorectoby]

Yes it does. Very well.

[@Lariofoto]

PhotoRec TV thanks so much, I appreciate! Great video as always btw 😉 cheers from Italy!

[@DmitryBrodsky007]

with a Caveat. I noticed on A9 (not on A7RII) that with A9, Sigma 35 Art works the best with MC11 adapter, in CAF, not as good as with SAF. Strangely.

[@Vinny-V]

Which is better between Canon 135mm f2 vs sigma 135mm f1.8? I’m confused!

[@Ranblv]

You consider 1400$ for a prime lens affordable? Damn my life sucks *sigh* I use 85mm F/1.8 on a crop body which in fact is a 135 equivalent. tack sharp.

[@photorectoby]

I hear ya - I am not saying it's cheap but for the quality, this is an affordable lens. The 85mm f/1.8 is a much more budget friendly alternative. The differences between the two in Chromatic Aberration and sharpness are noticeable though.

[@bilal-zr6uy]

A crop focal of 85mm is not the same as fulframe 135. The compression is different

[@Thevikingcam]

@@bilal-zr6uy Totally different.

[@mohammadhamzaalam]

what 70-200 do you use? i dont have eye af with my sigma 70-200. im using mc11 with my a6500

[@subaktagin]

I have canon 80D(APSC) please help which one is more better sigma 85 mm 1.4f art OR sigma 135 1.8f art OR canon 85mm 1.4 IS due to IS. Hope for you kind feedback soon. :)

[@CVNTGETENOUGH]

Nikon 105mm f/1.4 or Sigma 135mm f/1.8? Focus speed/accuracy and bokeh

[@patrickvanbaarle3483]

It's the best portrait lens compared to what? 135 F/2 dc for Nikon? Mitakon ZY Optics 85mm f/1.2? Voigtlander 58 f/1.4? Because my Voigtlander "destroys" my Sigma 50mm F1.4. Its very simple the DXOmark "sharpness" from the Sigma lens comes at a cost of rendering and color rendition. In Lightroom, you can not tweak a sigma look much. I find that the sigma, because of the focus in sharpness does not render bokeh as smoothly. For portraits especially women I rather not have everything super sharp but a better rendering and smoothness I can get from the voigtlander. Compared to the older 70-200 canon and Nikon 2.8, yes of course this option is going to be better. I rather have chromatic aberration then lack of micro contrast and Sigma high element counts sandwiches the image to gain that sharpness. And for 80,- you can pick up a 135 f2.8 ais that still will produce an image that is workable at a fraction of the cost of the Sigma. Expensive does not mean better value.

[@nayemorrahaman9623]

I have a Dream that One Day 1400$ will be Affordable for me!

[@maratginiyatullin3810]

Nayemor Rahaman that’s a good goal

[@CreativeFilmmakersInc]

please buy a manual Nikon 135 2.8 vintage from ebay today no need to dream its 100 usd... and take better pic than this guy

[@reoflex]

Had they given the 85, 105, and 135mm Art lenses image stabilization, Sigma would own the prime portrait market. I’m sending the 85mm Art back. I simply can not get a handheld image sharp. On a tripod it’s razor sharp, but in my hands, even at 1/5000 I can not get a sharp image. I can not figure this out. I can easily get sharp pictures on three zooms that I have that will shoot at 85mm with OS turned off, but not the Sigma. Could there be a mechanical reason for this?

[@reoflex]

Where’s the meta data on the LR images? Otherwise very helpful.

[@duartefaria7134]

Micro adjust for Sigma 135mm 1.8 Art in a Nikon D850 (20x distance) using Auto-Fine Tune: (+4; +3; +6; +3; +6; +2; +5; +2; +5; +3) / 10 = +3,9 = Micro Adjust= +4

[@photorectoby]

Each lens and camera is different - they don't all line up exactly.

[@MrK67017]

35 mm v 50 mm v 135 mm v 200 mm for portraits. Its all about what you prefer and what you can afford to shoot with.

[@greggoodenough5607]

Speaking of portrait lenses.. I used a 600mm f4 on one of my shoots. Talk about bokeh.. Haha.

[@MullahSteinberg]

Idiot

[@greggoodenough5607]

Just using what I've got

[@MF.Productions]

lol 600mm "NOTE: #txt the Model for position changes".... @135mm that would be the furthest distance to my Model without a screaming match and anger management unless we are talking headshots.

[@maratginiyatullin3810]

I use nikon p900 @2000mm for portraits. Talk about bokeh!

[@justinholding02]

Don't underestimate the 135 f2 lord of the red rings. It's an awesome piece of kit.

[@RaymondWong2k]

i just 'upgraded' from the 135 f2 to the 135A, and honestly for the casual shooter I am , i don't see much difference in image quality, atleast not worth the extra $$$$

[@justinholding02]

Raymond Wong people always rant about sharpness, but the best photos aren't all about perfection. You say you upgraded? I would call that a downgrade lol. What's the AF like?

[@RaymondWong2k]

justin holding that's why I put upgraded in quotes eg. Meaning it's a downgrade

[@justinholding02]

Raymond Wong got it ;-). Nice to hear some feedback from someone who has actually owned both. I honestly don't think you can get much better than the 135L

[@shaolin95]

justin holding lol it was...on a monster like the A7Rii its age shows badly. Just look at reviews. The sigma has zero CA unlike the Canon. The sigma it has smoother bokeh and the sigma is sharper on the edges at 1.8 than the Canon is in the center stopped down! The Canon is just not even close

[@ferhankhan801]

Longer focal lengths compress and flatten the face out not the best for wide faces. A shorter focal length is better for those faces. Also a shorter focal length creates much more three dimensionality

[@MrDan1509]

Canon 200mm F/2.8 hands down and i'm a Nikon guy!

[@esppics21]

I have that lens too and it's amazing.

[@YuserAlhaj]

is it too long????

[@BlaxkNobility]

What is the point of paying so much for lens and you have to an adapter.

[@photorectoby]

You are not wrong but at the time of this video there were not good options from Sony. It still is a fantastic lens - just not best on the Sony.

[@gudmgu]

Why are Sony users always adapting lenses. Can't the not just get a lens that fits like Canon and Nikon users do?

[@photorectoby]

Good Question! At this time Sony still does not have as many lenses as are available to Canon and Nikon. Sony has made great progress over the last 18 months releasing lots of excellent lenses but they are still missing some that portrait photographers love and the ones they do have are quite pricey. For Sony shooters, I would recommend the 85mm f/1.4 G Master over this adapter Sigma 135 BUT that Sony 85 is $1700 :( If AF worked better the Sigma would be a great choice for some.

[@gudmgu]

But this is a Sigma lens. Why can't Sigma make one that fits Sony e-mount? Sony is not a smal camerabrand like Pentax.

[@photorectoby]

That's another great question. It seems that Sigma has been waiting to see exactly how well the e-mount system sells. they make lenses for Sony crop sensors - just none at this time for full frame. recent interviews with Sigma execs lead me to believe they will soon.

[@shaolin95]

Gudmundur G it's called options mate. Unlike you...we get to pick any lens we like we are not stuck with single choices.

[@villageblunder4787]

It's not just a case of changing the mount and modifying the autofocus protocols. To be a true mirrorless lens the optics need to be redesigned to take advantage of the reduced flange distance that mirrorless offers.

[@jtes1442]

For indoors the 135 is also great for headshots. You should try some next time.

[@photorectoby]

I say exactly that in the video :)

[@XxCrazZyNo0oBxX]

Nikon 105mm f/1.4 -> the best portrait lens!

[@BrokerFr8]

How would this lens be on a Canon 70d?

[@MrK67017]

Honestly, I think if you own any decent performing 70-200 lens, you don't "need" this lens. However, if you have G.A.S., you may want to go ahead and pick one up.

[@brendanoreilly2014]

i have both lenses and some very heavy GAS

[@CreativeFilmmakersInc]

Nikon 135 2.8 ai manual lens can take better pic than this and cost only 100 usd on ebay

[@DavidWilliams-wj4sc]

I like shooting with my sigma 80 and 5 lens. but for groups I like shooting my canon 30 and 5. lol why does this guy say 100 AND 35 so many times? It's a one hundred thirty five not a one hundred AND thirty five. ha Anyway, good vid, altho to be fair the canon 135 f2.0 is like 25 years old, who wouldn't think the Sigma is better? Of course not weather sealed. Also this 135 would suck on a cropped sensor camera.

[@hakanyucel1639]

Canon 135 is 20 year old buddy ....

[@suranjankarmakar2356]

holy shit!!!!!!!!!!!!!! canon is over 20 years old. Still one of the sharpest. You all youtubers have nothing to do without posting videos on youtube. canon haters.

[@wanneske1969]

Such a heavy lens looks quite weird on a small camera and I guess it drags it donw ?

[@sapneshnaik]

First