Which 135mm is Better?! - Sigma Art f/1.8 VS Zeiss Batis f/2.8 - Sony a7III a7RIII

[@SilatShooter]

I have the Batis 135mm and it's stellar! Handles and focuses extremely well and sharpness is SICK! Love it!

[@JasonVong]

"LIKE" If you're getting the Sigma Art 135mm!

[@tomirwin4260]

Have had the e mount version it for a month. I don't have the Zeiss for comparison but for portraits the Sigma is the best lense I've ever owned. Amazing sharpness and color plus the focus is quick and accurate. This replaced my Sony 85 1.8 as well as my Tamron 70-200 G2 Canon/MC-11 combo. The Sigma is one of the rare lenses that can produce magical images.

[@JasonVong]

Tom Irwin awesome Tom!

[@ethanmay1767]

Jason Vong I got my 135 1.8 a year ago and love it. Now I'm looking forward to the 40mm Art.

[@joaovieira3487]

Got mine today

[@jamesdeak630]

Zeiss glass is a much more refined glass, there is micro contrast that isn't in sigma lenses, there's a reason why Zeiss glass is superior to most

[@JasonVong]

"LIKE" If you're getting the Zeiss Batis 135mm!

[@johncampbell335]

LIKE! I have the 25 and the 85. 135 is next. The weight really matters to me.

[@kane01337]

You should do a section on chromatic abberation - often a dealbreaker - especially with video , shoot some glare / chrome / harsh highlights on trees etc - would be interesting to see how the sigma holds up - the Zeiss correction is next level in difficult lighting / harsh situations / highlight handling... a lot of people dont even realise how good an APO lens is !

[@robertmcdaniel7788]

The Batis 135 after Christmas "sale" is going on at a price of $1,529. I would love the Sigma 1.8 but schlepping around that big-ass-2.49 lbs is a bit much. And I don't like that extra adapter length on the Sigma. Heck my 24-70 GM is 1.95 lbs and that's plenty for me. I'll be happy with the Batis. I actually thought about the Samyang 135/2.0, briefly.

[@rattoh]

I prefer the weight and size of the Zeiss. Plus the Zeiss is an APO lens.

[@grapefruitdream]

What's APO?

[@Awkventurer]

What is APo?

[@YC305]

@@grapefruitdream kzbin.info/www/bejne/m2m7d4Jre9Z2pNk

[@YC305]

@@Awkventurer kzbin.info/www/bejne/m2m7d4Jre9Z2pNk

[@sprobertson]

I'm renting both and the Sigma by itself weighs more than the Zeiss attached to my camera

[@jimmysgameclips]

I know it's not the thing to focus on but I frikkin love how that Zeiss lens looks, it's a beautiful piece of design

[@oemersu]

Together with the gmaster Apple of the lenses

[@gdjaybee742]

Just realized, Autofocus comparison was not done correctly. At 1.8 the Sigma will be definitely slower autofocusing because of the thinner debt of field. Aperture on the Sigma should have been set to 2.8 the same as the max aperture of the Zeiss to make is an apple to apple comparison. There's a reason why Sony or Nikon nailed their video manual settings autofocus to 3.5 max.

[@schtggl6265]

I use the Zeiss with an ETZ21 on my Nikon Zs (Fc,6,9) - and I love it. The only problem is with the ETZ21: you can't switch off the VibrationReduktion..

[@jakubkwap3423]

I'm buying Sigma. I had Nikkor 105/1.4 and need something with that separation. Tested the 135 and it's great! AF it's not the best but it's ok for photos :). I will not wait for the GM because the price will kill me :p

[@howardecheverry2819]

La ciencia de color y textura del Zeiss Batis es una bestialidad ❤, he tenido los dos y no cambio el Zeiss.

[@subirthapa8542]

How is the AF of 135 Sigma with A7r 3 Jason ? Low Light and for mild moving subjects? and Eye AF too?

[@bfvader]

Not seeing the point of getting the Zeiss 135/2.8 when I already have the 70-200/2.8 GM OSS. I'm in love with my Samyang 135mm f/2.0 with its ridiculous sharpness and buttery bokeh, but I'm really tempted by the Sigma just for the autofocus. The persistent 135GM rumours are killing me, lol.

[@bizzybone485]

I am really curious myself Dave. Is it Photokina that its suppose to be announced?

[@aypphotographyworkshop3154]

Which a better?sigma 135mm f1.8 or Zeiss Batis 135mm f2.8? I want buy sigma 135mm f1.8,this week....

[@brianknight7208]

I might be wrong, but I think the Sigma does not have stabilization, unlike the Zeiss. Does this make a difference?

[@jvborehed]

YAAAAAAS the one I've been waiting for! Thanks Jason!

[@JasonVong]

You're welcome!

[@yourcontentnz4838]

Thanks for putting some fun into the advertising plug. I'm still not going to buy what your selling, but I defiantly appreciated the effort.

[@MestreMur]

To be honest the Zeiss photos looks sharpers (perfect eye lashes and eye)... Similar color! Just a little bit back bluer with Sigma! Zeiss Batis 135 and 40mm will be my next lenses!

[@lilnape2604]

Gustavo Ulloa The Zeiss has a much wider field of focus. Sigma’s is so thin at 1.8 that you’ll get the eye sharp and soft lashes from time to time. Of course that depends on distance and head positioning.

[@juanargueta5988]

Jason u think its still worth it in 2024 for $500 the batis 135mm

[@bnardpolo96]

I rent both and both is razor sharp. The biggest difference is the color. The zeiss color pop out more.

[@YAJIE-ARCH]

Please compare Zeiss 25mm f2 with GM 24mm f1.4!

[@brianFitzGibbon]

Thanks for the great reviews, Jason. One reviewer I watched complained of focus breathing in video mode with the Batis 135mm, is that an issue you ever encountered? I love my Batis 40mm and am very tempted by the 135mm.

[@milikitaworkshop1540]

Sorry its hard to see the difference in my litle android..does ZEISS name tag mean something? Color or so called 3d bokeh for example?

[@SebHazel]

Jason am I totally wrong here or would the Sony 85mm f1.8 in Super 35 Crop Mode look almost exactly the same as the Batis 135mm f2.8 in full frame mode? 85*1.5=128mm, 1.8*1.5=f2.7. So for video you’d only need the 85mm, right? :O

[@JasonVong]

I'm not sure about the technical details but I often abuse S35 mode with the 85mm. Looks fantastic!

[@evokestudioio]

Your 85 cropped would be like a 135 f4 f And Double the noise. Your compression would not be a 135. Compression of the background would still be at 85 (compression wise) just cropped. The 85 1.8 is not as good as the batis 135. Mtf chart or real World comparison.. I have the 135 and rented the Sony85 1.8 the other day. I also have the Gmaster 85 I think that’s right^.. the math Like I said I have the batis 135. But I am A working portfolio photographer. If I was not doing this professionally ( a lot) it would make no sense.

[@SebHazel]

Evoke Studio Photography thanks for your reply! :) I just have one question, are you sure that you’d lose one stop of light? Seeing as if you crop a picture, it doesn’t get darker. Totally onboard with that you’ll get a noisier image, plus I think in general s35 crop is slightly lower quality than FF. Also I’d need to read up more on how cropping affects lens compression, I’ve heard different people say different things. I’m just thinking, if I can get away with just the 85mm and save the money for another lens, that’d be great 😅

[@evokestudioio]

Seb Hazel Yes I think you’re correct We are not losing a stop of light... . So essentially were saying we do not lose any t-stops I have had pretty much every lens possible attached to my camera. If you want to email me I can talk you through some of my experience over the last five years. I shoot mostly primes unless I have to go to my zooms If u are shooting r2 or an r3 18mp is very healthy image still at x1.5/s35 (as long as your glass is sharp) So at any given focal length when you go into crop mode you would experience ISO noise is x1.5 T-stop is same Field of view is x1.5 -Compression is the same Distortion would be better by a small percentage(probably very very low percentage on a 85 mm and a greater percentage on a wider focal length like 35 mm) The only other thing I can think of is make sure you raise your reciprocal rule/shutter speed when you go to crop mode, I guess x1.5 too. ) What you would notice mostly if you had a 135 would be compression, and then you could crop to 200mm 😬

[@log0log]

"What you would notice mostly if you had a 135 would be compression" - only if you compare both lenses at f/2.8. But 85mm has f/1.8, so compression would be also +/- identical.

[@ZeAngryGerman]

Why not try the A-mount ZA 135mm f/1.8?

[@log0log]

Sigma 135/1.8 is around 1130$ new on ebay. Compare to price tag of CZ, even m4/3 lenses looks like reasonably priced.

[@itsNonin]

Apparently Sigma just released a firmware update for this lens, so I'd love to see how much it has improved!

[@Zimmy123]

I really like the batis. But why did Sony limit it to 10fps? That really sucks. 135mm is really great for wildlife like doves and blackbirds.

[@karlbratby4349]

Price 4 years on and the lens is still top draw , 1st class. You can pick up a mint used one for £650 which is a steal.

[@stefanusadrian8398]

which of both has more similar color (skintone) to sony fe lenses?

[@genxtechguy]

I use the Sigma 135 on my a6500 and GH5 (yes, GH5 + metabones) ... so sharp / smooth out of focus areas, love the mechanical focus .. but, yes it’s huge and heavy.

[@ypakabeckham]

Which metabones do you use?

[@genxtechguy]

Because it’s a full frame lens, I use the 0.64 XL.

[@ypakabeckham]

@@genxtechguy do u use an adapter on Sony? Which mount is ur Sigma 135?

[@genxtechguy]

The mc-11 adapter for the a6500.

[@genxtechguy]

The mc-11 adapter for the a6500.

[@clarissaduque1794]

Hi Jason what about the sony zeiss 150mm 1.8 ?

[@seaachphotography7678]

Please compare the Sony 135mm gm vs Sony zeiss 135mm f1.8 za

[@andrearock71]

I always enjoyed your channel even when I was a Nikon shooter lol But now that I make the change to Sony, I'm definitely taking every advice you gave ;) thank you!

[@technoalah]

Excellent video yet again cheers!

[@EmoEmu]

Seems pretty obvious that Sigma just stuck a fixed adapter onto their Art lenses rather than a real native FE mount. The AF (especially in video) just isn't matching what you get from a real FE lens.

[@piersoncampbell1500]

love your reviews bro. think I'll get the Batis when it goes on sale again. ( fAthers day ) thx!!!

[@town3]

Nice work JV hope all is well bro.

[@lindajonasson4129]

Ore for stills.. canon 135 mm f 2 + sigma mc-11

[@LuckXIII]

How about the 135 2.8 vs the sony gm 70-700 IQ?

[@IMDABROWN]

Viv makes a classic appearance!

[@kevinmorgan7085]

I wanna see Batis 135 f2.8 vs GM 70-200 f2.8 @135...

[@ajalbetjr]

Jason, the Zeiss consistently looks a touch WARMER throughout all your images, plus the AF is better in the Zeiss... I'm sorry but the choice here for me is for the Zeiss... And about the GMaster you KNOW it's gonna be $2,000 or so, no? Please contact Sony and get that Zeiss 25 vs. Sony 24 out STAT please hahaha!! Cheers!!

[@JasonVong]

I'm trying haha!

[@gregdali1011]

Zeiss really messed up making this lens f2.8 why not at least f2 ,is a beautiful lens but nobody wants f2.8

[@robbonner]

For that much $, really makes you wonder why it's not f2ish.

[@bfvader]

Zeiss releases a lot of slow glass at a premium; their rationale is that they focus on sharpness, colour, and distortion more than other manufacturers. That Sigma is sharper at 1.8 than the Zeiss is at 2.8 though... And looks just as good, so there goes that argument! lol

[@evokestudioio]

We shot 12 hour weddings. We have the 70-200gm and the batis 135.. we use the 135 a lot for weight savings.. if we don’t we are out of commission on a consistent basis with back and shoulder problems. It’s not just the 5 pounds.. it’s 5 pounds times 10hours Also in the studio for head shots we use the 85gm or 135 batis.. I barely shoot the batis at 2.8 because the depth of field is really shallow for headshot.. so I guess what I’m saying is there’s a space in certain peoples toolboxes. Not focusing on only one attribute of the tool but all attributes combined (I agree, $2000 is retarded ridiculous. No way, Got mine for 1400 used)

[@NetGawker]

They should've made a native emount 138mm f1.8.

[@longrider9551]

Greg i have been trying to decide, and own the 25/85 batis, I think the color and skin look nicer on the zeiss am I just being a fanboy ?lol

[@stevelien3568]

Hahah you and your hand in pocket focus test 😂

[@JasonVong]

😂

[@fotogulin]

I have batis 135 2.8.Super lens!

[@thomaspalmer5098]

Zeiss matters

[@8spiro]

plss im waiting your full review on sigma 24 art

[@JasonVong]

maybe I will do it when I compare it to the 24mm GM when it's out!

[@robertkrysik100]

I watched another video where the skin tone is different on these lenses so please tell me how true your test is?

[@Fontsman]

Not size, it's the weight.

[@oliverlison]

P I X E L Peeping. None is better. Absolutely none.

[@Itssanaullahrajpoot]

Why to get 135 2.8 when u can get 70-200 2.8

[@KeithOYS]

First! +1 if you liked before watching Jason's vids 😎

[@JasonVong]

you guys are DOPE AFFFFFFF!!

[@karlbratby4349]

Zeiss wins for me, wouldn’t touch the sigma with a poop stick 😂

[@leonardoiglesias2394]

Sweet lady, sweet couple. No doubt.

[@MegaUltraSuperDuable]

Now compare those two with the lighter and cheaper 135mm f1.8 AF samyang that are about to be released 🤩 kzbin.info/www/bejne/nGTGnHuFbLiagrs

[@DetroitDon25]

Dope Azz DUCCCCCC LOL

[@ethanmay1767]

@ 2:10 😅

[@tomistenqvist1311]

#newgear bought the Zeiss Batis 25mm f2 used for 850€ (around 800dollars i think) perfect condition and accident or not it came with a UV filter on it :D

[@tomistenqvist1311]

no wait probably 900 dorra

[@JasonVong]

Nice!!

[@NetGawker]

I'll keep my Sony Zeiss 135mm f1.8. It's the unmarked Otus!

[@bnardpolo96]

I have the 135mm f1.8 zeiss and it is really an otus. Just wish it focus half as well on compare to batis

[@NetGawker]

@@bnardpolo96 Definitely can't argue about the autofocus issues but I just compensate by manually focusing. The images are worth the extra effort.......and I don't know if the issues are related to the lens or the LAEA4 adapter.

[@bnardpolo96]

@@NetGawker if sony would came out with a real adapter for that lens. I wouldn't buy any 135mm.

[@richardbierman9856]

Who cares???? I mean, really!..

[@simeonkolev1231]

In what world the Batis is that much smaller :D it is lightweight but this stupid dildo design from zeiss is killing me. Why all Zeiss lenses have to be that fat? They can be really smaller but noooo :D. If you remove the hoods the Sigma art is almost the same size.

[@giyu7667]

2nd to watch this video!!

[@JasonVong]

😀