Sigma 56mm f1.4 vs Viltrox 56mm f1.4 IQ Comparison

• Sigma is considerably better than the Viltrox at wider apertures
• Viltrox closes up around f4 and from f5.6 they are fairly similar
• Sigma is on par with the XF 16-55 throughout the frame from f2.8 right through to f8
• One thing I did note was the MF on the Sigma was much easier to control than the Viltrox. With the Viltrox, especially at f1.4, the MF is pretty much 'blink and you miss it' whereas the Sigma has a nice slow and precise focus. I would imagine this could make for some lovely focus pulls but I'm not a video person so I've no idea!

GMacF said:

I was waiting for an X-mount comparison for these two lenses but got fed up waiting so I did my own (I also threw in a few shots from the 16-55 just for giggles)
I can't do a side by side with the XF 50 f2 as I no longer own it however below is a link to a thread where I compared it to the Viltrox, so it may provide some reference:
Viltrox 56mm vs XF 50mm f2

I only just received the Sigma this morning so I'm no position to offer any sort of review as of yet so I won't ramble on.

My gallery uploads are below:

Comparison shots

Just a good old brick (or in my case stone) wall and looking purely at sharpness and contrast. Once I have actually put the Sigma through its paces I will hopefully be able to compare AF performance, Bokeh etc etc.

The TL;DR -

• Sigma is considerably better than the Viltrox at wider apertures
• Viltrox closes up around f4 and from f5.6 they are fairly similar
• Sigma is on par with the XF 16-55 throughout the frame from f2.8 right through to f8
• One thing I did note was the MF on the Sigma was much easier to control than the Viltrox. With the Viltrox, especially at f1.4, the MF is pretty much 'blink and you miss it' whereas the Sigma has a nice slow and precise focus. I would imagine this could make for some lovely focus pulls but I'm not a video person so I've no idea!

Click to expand...

GMacF said:

• One thing I did note was the MF on the Sigma was much easier to control than the Viltrox. With the Viltrox, especially at f1.4, the MF is pretty much 'blink and you miss it' whereas the Sigma has a nice slow and precise focus. I would imagine this could make for some lovely focus pulls but I'm not a video person so I've no idea!

Click to expand...

Eric-P said:

Eric-P said:

• One thing I did note was the MF on the Sigma was much easier to control than the Viltrox. With the Viltrox, especially at f1.4, the MF is pretty much 'blink and you miss it' whereas the Sigma has a nice slow and precise focus. I would imagine this could make for some lovely focus pulls but I'm not a video person so I've no idea!

Click to expand...

-I found the MF pretty awful actually - way, way to slow gearing (and the 30mm is even worse..) The only way I found MF barely useable is to auto-focus, then fine-tune with MF if needed. In full MF I find it much too slow and almost impossible to use.. (Fortunately, I bought this lens for its IQ + AF abilities, so all good.. I have other lenses for MF..) - But loving this lens for it's IQ + size & weight + AF..

Click to expand...

Blood N Guts Murphy said:

There is no comparison between the terrible Viltrox (not surprising considering the amazing price) and the stunning Sigma (bargain) imho. The Fuji is great, but a bit boring once you have experienced the Sigma imho.

Click to expand...

Jr4photography said:

Hey, which lens do you prefer or suggest? Sigma 56 or viltrox 56. I'm really confused between the two and couldn't find a comparison of these on a fuji body.

Thanks

Jay

Click to expand...

Yister10 said:

I just wished the Viltrox had WR and I wish the sigma had a aperture ring. I want to sell the 50 f2 and maybe pick up the 56 1.2

Click to expand...