The Sigma 85mm Art

I have been looking at the Sigma 85 mm art lens. I stopped at B&H and tried the lens on a Canon 5D Mark IV at the lens counter. It looks like a really sweet lens. I know it'll give really nice bokeh, better than my Tamron 70-200mm F/2.8. I am curious if I will notice a significantly sharper image. My Tamron is pretty darn sharp. I am also wondering if I would see a better low light focusing and if focus lock is faster on this lens than the Tamron. In the end I am still window shopping and debating if my desire for this lens to be added to my photo tool box is more lust than necessity. Lol. I know I will enjoy the lens and it will probably be in my bag after I sell my Canon 100-400 L. But it is always good to hear others thoughts on this lens.

I tried it out too. It is a very good, but a very large lens. I am way past using this kind of behemoth to be honest, so I am not interested in it. I suspect the AF may be a little unreliable depending on the system and the camera body, but it seemed OK to me, but of course this was just a few test shots. I had the Sigma 85mm EX and that also was an excellent lens at half the weight of the ART.

 

I can't say whether you will really notice the difference with the Tamron 70-200mm at similar apertures: the real thing in my opinion you have to consider is really how much you will use it (and at f1.4) and, more to the point, will you want to lug it around? After much soul searching I replaced my 135L and 85 EX with the Canon 100mm macro IS, as I find this a more useful medium tele lens all round and much lighter. If you must have an 85 f1.4, however, I doubt you can get much better than the ART at this precise moment. In case you didn't know, Canon are due to release their own EF 85/1.4 IS this year so, frankly, I would recommend waiting to see that one before rushing to buy the ART. You can guarantee the AF will be spot on with that at least. Have you tried the Canon 85/1.2L or the 85/1.8?

Thanks, Robin. I would be using it on a 5D Mark IV primarily but I also have the 6D and 7D. I agree performance may vary by camera. I was not aware of Canon soon to release a new f/1.4. Thanks for that Intel. That will be worth a look and could change things. I did just see a YouTube video where the Canon f/1.2 was compared and the Sigma was shown to be sharper and produced a comparable bokeh. It would be interesting to see if Canon will make a f/1.4 sharper than their f/1.2 that produced as good bokeh. But perhaps Sigma's Art lens will force Canon to produce a better lens if possible.

I would like Canon to produce 85/2.8 USM small and light short telephoto. I shoot with my 85/1.8 at f5,6 - f11 very often so I find no use in large and heavy 1.4 lenses.

Also I think that f2.8 gives nice bokeh too.

by f2.8, the 85/1.8 is a very good, and it is small and light. I mean, I get why you'd want to shoot at f5.6 - f11, but those settings are not really what are typically considered 'portraiture' settings, and nearly every modern prime produces ridiculously sharp imagery in that range. For that use, a 24-105/4L would likely be just as useful (actually a whole lot MORE useful... In single subject portraiture, I typically range from f1.4-f4 (depending on if the background is an important aspect and should only be blurred only to isolate the subject or so as to be unidentifiably OOF) In the mid 2000s to 2010, primes were, frankly, bad WO, but in the last 5-7 yrs, they've come leaps and bounds. Now you can get, even at f1.4, the entire frame utterly sharp (on a flat plane obv). I'm sure the EF 85/1.4L will be an awesome lens... of course if we all stood around waiting for the latest greatest, we'd never take any pictures!

I am still considering this lens and really like the reviews but since Sigma did not include it in the $100 off sale for Art lenses this month, I have no sense of urgency to run out a buy it today for a bargain. I can pick it up anytime for that full price. It will give me time to see what Canon comes up with.

by f2.8, the 85/1.8 is a very good, and it is small and light. I mean, I get why you'd want to shoot at f5.6 - f11, but those settings are not really what are typically considered 'portraiture' settings, and nearly every modern prime produces ridiculously sharp imagery in that range.

 

I mainly shoot portraits for modelling agencies and when my background is 5 meters behind the model at f5.6 is as much out of focus as I want. When shooting on the streets of big city - background often is even blurred. In my private opinion portraits with completely blurred backgrounds are simply boring as hell. Thats why really small 85 would be great for me.

Sigma 85mm f/1.4 Art gets good notices, indeed. See early report at LensRental (link, I find Roger Cicala's writings and reviews top-rate)

I've always respected Sigma, and competition can only improve the breed overall.

In the past, they filled "gaps" in the offerings of the OEMs, but now they are challenging them on their home ground.

Thanks, Robin. I would be using it on a 5D Mark IV primarily but I also have the 6D and 7D. I agree performance may vary by camera. I was not aware of Canon soon to release a new f/1.4. Thanks for that Intel. That will be worth a look and could change things. I did just see a YouTube video where the Canon f/1.2 was compared and the Sigma was shown to be sharper and produced a comparable bokeh. It would be interesting to see if Canon will make a f/1.4 sharper than their f/1.2 that produced as good bokeh. But perhaps Sigma's Art lens will force Canon to produce a better lens if possible.

 

I shoot with a 5DIV and the Canon 70-200 F2.8 II IS and 85 1.2L II. personally, I don't think Canon can make a lens any better than those two lenses. I also shoot with the Tamron 24-70 F2.8 VC and Tamron 70-300 F4-5.6 VC. The sharpest of all these lenses is the Canon 70-200 F2.8 IS II, the most exotic looking images come from the 85 1.2L (but it is a slow heavy lens and I only shoot it at F1.2). In low light, NOTHING can touch the 85 1.2L for fast focusing the 70-200. My most versatile and useful lens by FAR is the Tamron 24-70 F2.8 VC.

 

I upgrade my Sigma 70-200 EX as after a years of hard use it just started looking bad. All the paint has peeled off and although it still take decent photos it looks terrible. It is not nearly as fast or as sharp as the Canon L. Long story short, going forward i will just invest in Canon L-series lenses as they have the longest life and resale value. Tamron and Sigma's get eh job done but they are not as good as Canon L.