# Review: Sigma 85mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art



## Canon Rumors Guy (Dec 20, 2016)

```
The-Digital-Picture has completed their review of the brand new Sigma 85mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art series lens. It looks like the accolades for this lens are going to continue as more reviews come out.</p>
<blockquote><p>With impressive 85mm f/1.4 image quality in a beautiful, well built lens with autofocus and a reasonable price, this is the portrait lens that a lot of photographers have been waiting for. While the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Lens, overall, is one of the greatest 85mm lenses ever made, the lack of image stabilization and bit of axial CA/spherical aberration/spherochromatism leave the door cracked open just slightly for a competitor to one-up it. But, for now and for most people, this is the 85mm lens to get. Most, if not all, of your portrait and other 85mm needs will be well served with this lens. <a href="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-85mm-f-1.4-DG-HSM-Art-Lens.aspx">Read the full review</a></p></blockquote>
<p>We’re expecting to see a Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS some time in 2017, which will likely give this Sigma a run for its money, but for a price.</p>
<p>Sigma 85mm f/1.4 Art $1199: <a href="https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1282165-REG/sigma_321955_85mm_f_1_4_dg_hsm.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296">B&H Photo</a> | <a href="http://amzn.to/2cV8eda">Amazon</a> | <a href="http://www.adorama.com/SG8514ACA.html?KBID=64393">Adorama</a> | <a href="https://mpex.com/sigma-85mm-f1-4-dg-hsm-art-lens-canon.html?acc=3">Midwest Photo</a></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 20, 2016)

We expected this lens would be a razor blade sharpness-wise from other reports, but I think the AF will make or break an f/1.4 lens like this. And now we have two different sources with positive news:

From TDP: 

_"After capturing over 600 tripod-based images of various subjects strictly for the purpose of testing AF, each capture starting in an out-of-focus condition, I found that this lens focuses consistently accurately. Not every image is perfectly sharp, but a very considerable percentage of them are. Expect peripheral AF points to be slightly less accurate than the center, but they are still working mostly well for me."
_
This is in-line with the LensTip finding:
_
"When it comes to the accuracy the Sigma results were very good – in studio conditions the lens hardly ever missed. It also didn’t need any calibration when attached to any of the bodies, and photos below are the proof.

In order to be absolutely sure our results were right we took two additional tests, similar to those we perform while testing cameras. We put the Sigma attached to the EOS 5D Mark III before one of our charts and, by f/2.8 we took 50 photos setting the focus every time anew. There were 59% of shots with perfect sharpness, 39% of photos with errors smaller than 20% of the maximum MTF50 and only 2% of shots which should be considered complete misses.

Then we raised the standards even higher and repeated the experiment by f/1.4. What’s interesting, the results were even better, with 75% of perfectly sharp photos, 23% of acceptable ones and once again just 2% of misses."_

Both sites' results are improvements over the 50 f/1.4 Art, which had the famous not-dock-correctible inconsistency issue. 

Our own Dustin Abbott has also had a look at the AF in some detail:
https://dustinabbott.net/2016/12/sigma-85mm-f1-4-dg-hsm-art-review/

I know those numbers from LensTip (in brown above) seem like less than perfection, but that's a higher bar than they typically test lenses, and we don't have other f/1.4 lens performance under that same scrutiny to compare it to. Consider that LT specifically called out the AF accuracy as a pro and not a con with their summary.

I welcome more reviewers here, but it would appear that Sigma has gotten their biggest monkey off their back. Were I in the market for a portrait lens, I'd snap this up in a heartbeat.

- A


----------



## Jopa (Dec 20, 2016)

Based on my experience, it's quite accurate on the tripod shooting a calibration chart (center AF point), IRL it delivers the same accuracy as any Canon L lens. I guess some errors are possible due to the nature of PDAF. 
Very enjoyable lens btw, now it pretty much always stays on my camera, the rendering is amazing. If Canon makes a similar lens with IS, it will be DA BOMB


----------



## Andrew Davies Photography (Dec 21, 2016)

OK so from reading that 2% of shots were classed as misses ! I wouldn't want to be seeing any misses on a 1200 dollar lens, cant say i have noticed anything like 2% from my Canon 85 or 135 and I have shot thousands of shots. I was looking forward to the reviews on this and quite interested in adding it to the arsenal but a little put off now ...



Wedding Photographer North East & Yorkshire Northumberland & Wedding Photographer Cumbria


----------



## Alex_M (Dec 21, 2016)

well, that is quite impossible as all lenses do miss. such is the nature of Phase Detection Autofocus. I am sorry... If you ever used Reikan FoCal to AFMA your Canon lens, you would have noticed that even perfectly calibrated lens not always at it's best sharpness. we deal with electro - mechanical system - there is always a chance for an error in such a system.
2% miss rate widely considered to be excellent. I was shooting with this lens all day and not experienced a single miss so far. 



Andrew Davies Photography said:


> OK so from reading that 2% of shots were classed as misses ! I wouldn't want to be seeing any misses on a 1200 dollar lens, cant say i have noticed anything like 2% from my Canon 85 or 135 and I have shot thousands of shots. I was looking forward to the reviews on this and quite interested in adding it to the arsenal but a little put off now ...
> 
> 
> 
> Wedding Photographer North East & Yorkshire Northumberland & Wedding Photographer Cumbria


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 21, 2016)

Andrew Davies Photography said:


> OK so from reading that 2% of shots were classed as misses ! I wouldn't want to be seeing any misses on a 1200 dollar lens, cant say i have noticed anything like 2% from my Canon 85 or 135 and I have shot thousands of shots. I was looking forward to the reviews on this and quite interested in adding it to the arsenal but a little put off now ...
> 
> 
> 
> Wedding Photographer North East & Yorkshire Northumberland & Wedding Photographer Cumbria



I knew someone would get wound up by that. 2% misses at f/1.4 is actually a very good result. The 50L (tested some time ago on a 1Ds3) had a 7% miss rate.

Keep in mind that LT have raised the bar here for the Sigma 85 Art and have to not subjected other lenses to this same 'perfect' / 'small errors' / miss ranking of shots. I find this to be a very good finding, but I also welcome more data on this.

- A


----------



## Jopa (Dec 21, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> Andrew Davies Photography said:
> 
> 
> > OK so from reading that 2% of shots were classed as misses ! I wouldn't want to be seeing any misses on a 1200 dollar lens, cant say i have noticed anything like 2% from my Canon 85 or 135 and I have shot thousands of shots. I was looking forward to the reviews on this and quite interested in adding it to the arsenal but a little put off now ...
> ...



It is a good result indeed, but depends on what the author thinks is a miss. A total miss (background vs foreground) or slightly, like 1mm OOF? The first one is probably a camera issue, the second one is nothing new for any PDAF, I wish all my lenses stayed within 2%


----------



## Talley (Dec 21, 2016)

My copy is rock solid and performs no different than a "L" glass. I've had em all. This 85 Art performs identical to the 200 F2 IS that I own. AF accuracy, sharpness, etc everything. 

The 85 Art is truly impressive!


----------



## Maiaibing (Dec 21, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> We expected this lens would be a razor blade sharpness-wise from other reports, but I think the AF will make or break an f/1.4 lens like this. And now we have two different sources with positive news:



Only thing keeping me back is the Canon 85mm f/1.4 IS that (maybe) is conming to a store close to us next year. Very impressive lens by all accounts so far.


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 21, 2016)

Maiaibing said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > We expected this lens would be a razor blade sharpness-wise from other reports, but I think the AF will make or break an f/1.4 lens like this. And now we have two different sources with positive news:
> ...



The timing the 85 f/1.4L IS rumor is suspicious -- it dropped just as the 85 Art reviews started coming in. 

One could allege it was a deliberate leak by Canon to discourage prospective 85 Art buyers. I appreciate Canon doesn't quake in its boots at what Sigma is up to. But if an 85mm f/1.4L IS project team at Canon is mapping out a SWOT analysis of the project/market/etc., one would bet good money the 85 Art at least made the first-pass whiteboard list as a threat.

- A


----------



## Andrew Davies Photography (Dec 21, 2016)

OK so maybe its not so bad , in my line of work the idea i could get a missed oof shot is quite alarming but if we are really only talking a couple of mm on a tripod against a test target then surely it has no place in the real world and is a pointless result unless your job is shooting test targets . What is actually defined as a miss do we think ?

Has any one been able to compare it with either the 85mm 1.8 canon or the 135mmL F2 Canon which at the moment are my go to lenses for portraits etc , the 1.8 suffer with pretty bad fringing and the 135 is awful slow focussing in low light so have been looking for something that corrects those and this seems to be likely.


----------



## Alex_M (Dec 22, 2016)

Jopa,

no , not a total miss. they consider anything less than 20% of maximum sharpness achieved as a miss. so we are talking few mm really for portraiture applications. And.. 20% less than maximum sharpness with this lens at @2.6m distance to subject and wide open is still better than Sigma 35 1.4 Art wide open at its maximum sharpness. This glass is insanely, crazy sharp!

Actually, I figured out how Sigma was more accurate in LensTip AF accuracy test at F1.4 than at F2.8: 

*Focus Shift is to blame!* at F2.8 the lens missed a bit more due to the Focal plain shift towards infinity. I am noticing a bit of it as I played with the lens quite a lot over last two days just to get a sense of it.



Jopa said:


> It is a good result indeed, but depends on what the author thinks is a miss. A total miss (background vs foreground) or slightly, like 1mm OOF? The first one is probably a camera issue, the second one is nothing new for any PDAF, I wish all my lenses stayed within 2%


----------



## Alex_M (Dec 22, 2016)

Andrew, 
85 /1.8 does not belong to the league Sigma 85 1.4 Art plays in  I am sorry, like chalk and cheese. seriously.
Not sure if 85mm is a fair comparison to 135mm focal range? they are quite different animals from perspective and background compression stand point? I can confirm that Sigma focused for me quite snappy in low light. That I am sure about.



Andrew Davies Photography said:


> Has any one been able to compare it with either the 85mm 1.8 canon or the 135mmL F2 Canon which at the moment are my go to lenses for portraits etc , the 1.8 suffer with pretty bad fringing and the 135 is awful slow focussing in low light so have been looking for something that corrects those and this seems to be likely.


----------



## abbaen (Dec 22, 2016)

I recently got this lens and I can agree that the focus is more reliable and consistent compared to other Sigma lenses, especially the 35mm ART that I have.

An observation I had was that during my focus calibration using the Sigma dock, my adjustments for each of the focus distances was consistent across the entire range. I needed +10 for everything. Compare that to my 35mm Art which needed +4, +6, +9 and +4 over the 4 different focus distances. That being said, calibration with the 85 Art could easily be accomplished with microadjust without the dock!

I know this is just in my example but overall while I was doing calibration testing, the focus was more consistent.


----------



## chmteacher (Dec 23, 2016)

How about pairing this with APS-C? I have a 70D and find myself using this focal range a lot.


----------



## Jopa (Dec 26, 2016)

Alex_M said:


> *Focus Shift is to blame!* at F2.8 the lens missed a bit more due to the Focal plain shift towards infinity. I am noticing a bit of it as I played with the lens quite a lot over last two days just to get a sense of it.


Indeed my friend. More I shoot - more I see it. Fortunately I mostly shoot wide open. I also noticed it focuses quite reliably via CDAF, probably because the camera is trying to emulate exposure and closes the aperture blades to match the f stop. Took a few shots in a local park yesterday: https://flic.kr/s/aHskRnj9a2, IMHO a 50Mpx sensor is nothing for this lens, Canon needs to hurry and give us the promised 120Mpx one


----------



## Maiaibing (Dec 26, 2016)

Jopa said:


> Fortunately I mostly shoot wide open. I also noticed it focuses quite reliably via CDAF, probably because the camera is trying to emulate exposure and closes the aperture blades to match the f stop. Took a few shots in a local park yesterday: https://flic.kr/s/aHskRnj9a2, IMHO a 50Mpx sensor is nothing for this lens, Canon needs to hurry and give us the promised 120Mpx one


Looks great. This one came out very well: https://www.flickr.com/photos/omproject/31879698615/in/album-72157678303425195/


----------



## Jopa (Dec 26, 2016)

Maiaibing said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > Fortunately I mostly shoot wide open. I also noticed it focuses quite reliably via CDAF, probably because the camera is trying to emulate exposure and closes the aperture blades to match the f stop. Took a few shots in a local park yesterday: https://flic.kr/s/aHskRnj9a2, IMHO a 50Mpx sensor is nothing for this lens, Canon needs to hurry and give us the promised 120Mpx one
> ...



Thank you!
My standard picture viewing device is a 10" android tablet via QuickPic (it loads the whole image without downsampling). I think the tablet has quad HD resolution or similar, not 4k, but higher than 1080p. And my favorite "thing" when I look at something taken with the 5dsr is to zoom in to 100% and see all details: reflections in the eyes, tiny fascial hairs, every tiny detail that's in focus. And I must admit this Sigma delivers it all  It's harder to shoot it on the 5dsr, but amount of keepers is still very high.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Jan 6, 2017)

I have the Sigma 85 1.4 Art and borrowed a 85 1.2 II L. For wedding pictures, fast AF is a must and this is where the Sigma 85 1.4 Art exceed the Canon. Once calibrated, it's very accurate and quick. It's big and heavy but so is my 70-200II 2.8. I used to use my 70-200 for most of my portraits needs, but have been replacing that with my 85 1.4 Art when it's single subject. The bokeh, sharpness, build are great.


----------

