slightly + slightly != clearly
genuine brand 105mm > third party 85mm + slightly
sharpness != everything

@marike: This was tested on the 5diii body, which (including AA filter) is more forgiving. I could easily image the Sigma Art to be a bit sharper. However, the advantage of the Sony is that I can use eye AF or focus on the 1/3 line without having to fear that the AF consistency isn't there. When using the Sigma at Photokina, I found the weight to be a foctor, too.

The lens was designed to compete with Zeiss Otus, to prove that it's possible to get the same or better results with a $1200 lens compared to $3000... I have the lens and I must tell you the lens creates spectacular results in the right hand
http://www.lenstip.com/491.1-Lens_review-Sigma_A_85_mm_f_1.4_DG_HSM.html

Ah, I get it. I've deciphered your comment.

So, you want a heavier, bigger third party device that has lemon shaped bokeh and isn't as sharp or contrasty as the Sony, because, let's face it, you don't have a Sony and can't mate it to your DSLR via an adaptor.

It's really not that difficult to just say that Sony make some good stuff, sure they have bad stuff as well, but in this instance, the 85GM is the best 85mm lens for full frame sensors available.

The noises are normal for any lens and the grease inside is in every lens that has moving parts (i.e. every lens).
Some people just make a bigger deal out of it than others because they complain about gear rather than using it.

honestly, Im not very thrilled by these samples(especially by their bokeh).... please explain what makes this lens the "king of 85"?

@marike6
where exactly do you see a head-to-head comparison to the GM in the lenstip article? There is no mention of the sony lens in the review...
...anyway, you still didnt explain the "king of 85" statement. Is it based on the lenstip article? Cause I dont see anything "kingish" in these samples..only harsh bokeh....

There's more to a lens than images results.

AF accuracy and reliability, render quality etc.
The Sigma Art 35 wins against the Zony, the 85 doesn't.

@DamianFI how do you know how if the Sigma 85 isn't accurate? I'm shooting it since Mon on 5dsr and 1dx2, and after a quick calibration with FoCal it's dead accurate and consistent.

I was told by a 5DIV shooter that it wasn't as accurate or as quick as by the 85GM and the 85HSM.

I own all Sigma Art lenses bar one (or two) and love them, this is the first Art lens I won't buy because I already have the 85GM and don't see any real value to the Sigma.

I'll have to attempt to test the 85GM against the 85Art on a Sony body in order to fairly judge IQ, but so far the 85 Art seems, at best, a match for the Sony in resolution and contrast in the centre and corners and the 85GM by a country mile, beating all 85's including the Art, the Batis etc. for bokeh, which in a fast 85mm destined to shoot portraits its whole life is a highly desirable quality and the reason the Batis 85 was sold and replaced with the 85GM.

I still like the 85G on the Nikon bodies, very nice, if anything the 85Art would replace that, but I don't see the point given we have Sony bodies and the 85GM.

Also, EyeAF and the 85GM is great, the MC-11 is quite unreliable which the Art will require.

Learn here what makes it the "King" ... http://www.lenstip.com/491.1-Lens_review-Sigma_A_85_mm_f_1.4_DG_HSM.html

You buy all your lenses based on specifications and armchair reports?
I feel sorry for your clients.

Like I said, Art lenses are great, but the 85 Art isn't as impressive as the others and is out done by the gorgeous character of the 85GM for not much more money.

The GM works well on the best FF body available for portrait work (A7RII because DR, resolution and EyeAF) whilst the 85Art requires the unreliable MC-11 adaptor.

So many more better images will come from an A7RII + 85GM combo than a D810 or 5DSR + 85Art combo.

Forget your lens tip report which is a single report AND flawed as it doesn't mention real world shooting, bokeh characteristics, abaility to capture the closest eye in focus repeatedly in real world situations or compared on the same body.

Agree to disagree.

You're taking a review of a lens without any side by side real world testing on the same camera and using it to judge the product as 'the best'.

As I said, there's more to a lens than any one statistical value, e.g. sharpness.
If you buy lenses based on these kinds of reviews, you've got a lot to learn about professional photography at a high level.

I was trying to help you understand, but this will be my last reply.
Keep buying the stuff that rates high with imatest and don't forget to tell your clients that when they ask why the specular highlights are lemon edges and cats eyes with onion rings instead of perfectly round, soft balls, becuase they'll never notice your 2LP/mm increase in sharpness, end of story.

That's strange, I just shot an event with the 85GM yesterday and found absolutely none of the 85GM issues you state, which again makes me think that you're an armchair photogrpaher, not an actual professional photographer.

Statistical data is for photographers that don't actual make images, actual real world data is for actual photographers.

The 85GM was a joy to shoot and at f2.8 it had perfectly round specular highlights and super smooth and creamy oof backgrounds similar to all great 85's like the Nikkor 1.4/85D for one example.

Colour was fantastic and onion ringing from aspherics to a very low level.

The Sigma 35 and 50 shot were very sharp and contrasty, whilst the 35 Art was the best 35, the 50 Art wasn't as fast focusing or as fast in terms of light input as the Sony 1.8/55, which is smaller, lighter and cheaper.

Best Art lens is the 35, the 50 is nice, but not if you're shooting Sony.
The 1.4/20 is very nice, the 2/24-35 also fantastic.
The 85 Art looks OK, just OK.

marike, again, I don't buy lenses based on numbers from a single review that doesn't contain all the alternative choices, like the 85GM for example.

I buy based on actual use, on my own cameras. I shoot three different brands and have $30K of equipment, money isn't the issue, the look of the image, not the review, is.

The 85Art has specular highlights that are shaped like lemon wedges and such, the 85GM has the best bokeh of any 85 I've ever seen and I have 8 85mm lenses in my office, only one comes with me in my bag.

Again, stop referring to that one article, go and buy an 85 Art and a Sony 85GM, test them in the real world on the same camera and then come back to me, until then, continue to be the quintessential armchair photographer.

Yep, the Art does that worse, closer into the centre and much worse as you stop down the iris.

At f2.8 the Sony keeps those specular highlights MUCH more round and smooth where the Art doesn't control that characteristic as well.
You're starting to get my point I guess, I prefer the rendering of the 85GM to the 85Art.

I'm not saying I'm anti-Sigma, because I own many of their lenses and have long before the A,C & S lines were released, I'm saying the 85Art isn't the best 85mm as you first stated.

@DamianFI, why do you still bother. Its like talking to a brickwall (or photographing one, merike looks like a brickwall photographer, if you know what I mean). This guy needs some sort of numbers to tell him what is the best lens. Rendering? Forget about that..thats irrelevant for merike! Only thing that matters is sharpness! Because all his customers are viewing the final photo 100% zoomed, counting eyelashes :D :D

Yeah, I don't know why I spent the time, probably because I had a little of it.
Armchair photogrpahers also don't care about AF and reliability, manufacturer support etc.

One of the best bodies atm is the 7RII, especially for studio work with people because of its resolution and EyeAF feature and a Sigma Art won't work properly on that body, so it's an option I couldn't entertain.

The MC-11 isn't the best and having reliability issues makes it a no-no for pro work. Any support I need won't be available as Sony will use the fact a non-native lens is causing any issue to avoid support.

On the Nikon I'd consider the 85 Art, although I may continue to use the smaller, lighter still brilliant 1.4/85G.

No insults from me as far as I can see.

RE service, it may depend on your country, since Sony usually outsource its repairs etc.
I've used Sony to replace a lens that I didn't like as I thought the elements weren't aligned properly and it was no issue.

My body repair and service did take longer than my Nikon did, but still no issue.

I'm not a Sony fanboy, I shoot Panasonic and Nikon also.
I'm a BIG Sigma Art fan with many of their lenses, yet again, I don't like the 85 Art as much as the 85 GM, the very point I made at the very top of this ridiculous thread.

@Marike,just for the record: youre the one who started with insults calling Damian "delusional fanboy" as he tried to explain to you that theres more to lens than sharpness.
AND we were not talking about resolution, we were talking about your statement of sigma being the "king of all 85s". Youre the one twisting it all towards sharpness. Were just trying to explain to you that theres more to lens than resolution...but...well...whatever....hail the sigma king!!! :D :D :D

@josseee
I did not call Damian a "delusional fanboy", I never used that phrase, stop making things up.
https://www.dpreview.com/news/5149714467/it-s-finally-here-sigma-85mm-f1-4-dg-hsm-art-sample-gallery?comment=5140921662

And no I didn't twist anything toward sharpness, sharpness is not the only area that the Sigma 85 bests the Sony 85 GM according to the Lenstip review referenced above. But whatever, time for you guys to let it go. ;-)

OMG...you such a twister :D

quoting you:
"The 85 Art looks OK, just OK." Dude, you are delusional. The Sigma 85mm f/1.4 Art is one of the very best portrait lenses, and it's one of the sharpest, most optically perfect lenses that Lenstip has ever tested. Stop being such a Sony fanboy and let it go. You lost this round, end of story"

you called him delusional and a fanboy in one single post....but nooo, youre the polite guy, not using insults what so ever :D

+you still dont get what we are trying to tell you: there are non-measurable qualities to a lens which cant be rated by a lenstip article chart....

I have no idea why you'd make these statements with such confidence unless you're trying to convince yourself of a purchase. There's no direct comparison between the Sigma and the Sony, and lenstip already have a reputation for producing inconsistent results. That's not to say the Sigma definitely isn't as good, but jumping all over one isolated review is just crazy.

I never said the Sony was sharper, but it is just as sharp in real world photos.
I said the Sony was smaller, lighter and had better oof rendering, see my unedited comment above.

I stand by my comments after seeing many images from different cameras and comparing them to many, many 85GM images.

The best lenses ever have never been the ones with the highest ratings on sites like lenstip and DxO. Never. 'Best' is not a single performance characteristic like sharpness and the sharpness lead the Sigma has is negliable anyway.

Also, the Sony at f2.8 has STELLAR sharpness and uniformity, it's a very uniformly sharp lens, please don't make up nonsense and stick to facts.

@marike...Im not sticking up for anyone, Im just showing you what hypocrite you are....first using insults your self and then being soooo touchy and twisty when an insult flies your way...pathetic....

@marike nope, no insults from you what so ever..calling somebody a fanboy (aka a blinded, fanatic worshipper of a brand) is actually a compliment, right? ;)
The bokeh of this lens is generally very plain, a hash example can be seen in image #13... deal with it (like you say)

So I actually got my hands on the 85Art today and I gotta say it's pretty awesome, but I'm a huge Sigma fan, have been since my 10-20 crop lens.

Anyway, I maintain my original statement after testing, the Sigma isn't any sharper than the 85GM (85Art on a 5DSR and 85GM on 7RII) in real pictures, even pixel peeping.
The CA levels seem about the same, vignetting about the same, maybe a ting less towards the Sigma.

The 85Art wouldn't work on the 7RII via MC-11, but that could be firmware or something.

So optically the lenses are equals and better than the amazing 1.4/85G Nikon and much better than the 1.2/85 Canon.
The 85GM wins as it's smaller and lighter as well as better balanced than the 85Art, it also has a function button on the lens that I set to activate EyeAF and that's worth HEAPS of value imo.

The 85GM focuses VERY quickly on the body I prefer to use for portraits (7RII) and has a smooth (or clicking) aperture ring, which I use for video work and stills (A mode).

85GM FTW.

@DamianFI Since you have the Sony 1.4 would you mind to show us your pictures taken with both lenses so everybody can see the Sony's superiority? Otherwise it's just words... And you're right, the MC-11 does require a firmware update for the AF to work.

My personal (but short) experience - the Sony lens AF is slow and extremely noisy. It can be a clever trick for certain scenarios when you want people to look at your camera, but otherwise it's not ok. The GM balance on the tiny A7 body is quite bad (no better than the Sigma) compared to the Batis 85, but can be fixed by adding a battery grip.

I think you're missing your own point "there's more to a lens than any one statistical value, e.g. sharpness" comparing the 1.4 lenses to a 1.2 one. The Canon 1.2 can render the world @ f/1.2, and that only thing worth a lot.

FYI, FTW is an ambiguous abbreviation, while for the kids it means "for the win", for most adults it's "F the world" ;)

Sure, let me know how to upload an image and I'll happily do it.

I didn't miss my point, I detailed that the performance in many areas was so similar that any superiority in either couldn't be seen (even though the Art was used on a body with the capability of delivering more resolution).

I went on to mention the functionality the GM has that the Art doesn't (EyeAF activated from lens) as well as the fact that they GM felt lighter and was slightly but noticeably smaller, which is typically Sigma, most if not all their Art lenses are big and heavy.

Having said all that, if I was mating the Nikon to an 85GM, I'd probably buy the 85Art.
I use Nikon's with the 24-70 and 70-200's and a 7RII for 85, 7II with an ultra wide.

DPR has galleries (but I think there is a size limit on individual images) or you can just upload full size to Flickr.

The custom button on the lens is nice, and definitely it's hard to beat a native E-mount lens performance with something adapted, so the GM seems like a better choice for the A7r2, if the AF noise is not bothering you. The eye-af also works with the Sigma + MC-11, but no custom button. Theoretically Sigma could implement a button or two on the adapter itself (maybe v2?). For me it's ok since I use to press the C1 button on the camera since the original A7r, so I don't have to re-learn :)

Your configuration makes sense, but let's say if you have the Art, you could use it on your Nikon and Sony bodies, for me it would be a big plus, for you of course it can be different... Have a great rest of the weekend!

The AF noise of the 85GM is something I usually don't hear and my ear is a fe winches away from the device, so it's an 'issue' blown completely out of proportion by a few people, mostly armchair enthusiasts and Sony haters.

A button on the adaptor isn't a great solution as it's positioning would be horrible.
The MC-11 isn't reliable enough for the professional work I do so I will not work adapted unless I need a focal length that isn't available native.

The weight 'issue' of the lens on the 7RII is also exxagerated, for me it doesn't exist at all, the balance is perfect. The Sigma is bigger and heavier, so it would have the same issue on a DSLR and be even worse on a 7RII with the length of the adaptor.

The 85GM rests in my left hand, my thumb falls naturally on the function button and controls focus hold (EyeAF), my right hand controls all other functions, which isn't much, I'm usually in aperture priority and worrying about more important things such as my subject/s/comp.

Well, I'm neither, but I don't want to buy a lens that makes noise when it's not supposed to do. I had to return a few lenses in the past that were noisy (but actually quieter than the Sony).
The buttons would work anywhere where you remember them to be. Yes, it's a plus to have a button on the lens, but I personally don't see any problem by pressing a button on the camera or the adapter, it's all about muscle memory.
Any luck uploading the images? Thanks!

Having a button on an adaptor about 1cm from the body will destroy ergonomics, you'd have to jam your thumb (or finger) into the space between the body and you couldn't MF or balance the lens properly.

The only issue I have with the 85GM I forgot to mention earlier, which is a point all Sony haters should be raising -and this comes with my 10,000 images of experience with the 85GM is no manual focus override.
A point of frustration I've had and something I honestly didn't notice before buying, but expected, for a modern $2.5K lens.

Here's a recent 85GM shot of architecture for a company I contract to, for a prominent Melbournian builder. This is stopped down to f16, it's smallest aperture, with two 10 stop ND filters for a ~600 second LE:

https://scontent-syd2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/14753764_1132658766823193_1912972749676310217_o.jpg?oh=273793a4ea560329a70629ca4664f607&oe=58E4236A

Also, once more, I shoot Sony, Panasonic and Nikon and shoot with colleges that use Canon, no bias.

It's really hard to tell anything looking at a 720 x 1080 picture. Are you saying the Sigma won't be able to take a similar picture @ f/16? I know the sunstars would have 18 points instead of 22, but I'm not sure if your customer would count them or even spot any difference.
I see https://www.facebook.com/bespokeimaging.com.au/ you are a mirrorless fan?

I'm not able to share many images I take for work, this was just one I could.
I wasn't using it as an example of any flaw in the Sigma as the Sigma has veyr, VERY similar IQ to the Sony imo.

As I said above, the Sigma has no issues with IQ, it's mostly the balance and functionality I don't like as much as a Nikon 1.485G or Sony 85GM.

I see. Just out of curiosity - do you take images for fun / yourself? You seem to have a great collection of lenses and cameras, can't imagine all this stuff just laying somewhere on a shelf...

I personally don't own more than 4 lenses, but have access to close to one hundred.

I choose what works for me for each job whether it's paid or not.
For Christmas at home I chose the A6000 with the kit 16-50 for it's speed for fast moving children, compact size and because the camera is older and relatively cheap so if it's spilt with drink or dropped it won't be an issue.

I'm puzzled. Why would you use a junk lens to shoot a family event if you could do it with your 85GM? If you use the 85GM to shoot architecture only, why would you need the custom button assigned to the Eye-AF?
Same as you I also have access to quite a few lenses via a friend that owns a camera store / rental house here in Dallas, but I prefer to own stuff that (I think) worth owning. My current "go everywhere" system is the 1dx2 + either this ^ Sigma or the 70-200 II. It's also relatively cheap and I don't really care if something get spilt or dropped - CPS will repair it in a few days (except of the Sigma :) Today I decided to use my ol' good 5dsr + the Sigma to take a few pics of my daughters playing in a local park, and I think it's a better match for this lens, 20Mpx of the 1dx2 seems like a waste of the lens resolution: https://flic.kr/s/aHskRnj9a2

How is the 16-50 a junk lens?

It focuses more rapidly than any of my FE lenses, all of them.

It's sharp, it's tiny and super light, it's appropriate given the size and style of shooting I do around family, whilst I'm usually holding a drink, a child or eating food etc.

I can hand an A6000 over to a family member on Auto with that lens and they can use it for everything.

The 85GM and A7RII is larger, heavier, much more expensive, doesn't focus as quickly, is fixed at a ridiculously long focal length for family gatherings etc.
It's just the wrong combination for the situation, the hit and miss ratio is significantly in favour of the A6000, I know because I use them both and know them both well and prefer to get the images.

The A6000 is a very snappy camera, the quickest and most accurate with that size and weight. I find getting the shot when I usually have only one hand and may be very relaxed from over eating and alcohol the most important priority, the IQ is quite decent too.

Well, one doesn't buy cameras and lenses just to own them and discuss on random forums, with no actual usage only because they are expensive. If I spend any $ amount on gear, I'm going to use every single penny of it, otherwise I'll sell it. Even if we don't call the 16-50 junk, it's still won't render nearly as good as any 85 f/1.4, it's really hard to call it long, plus f/1.4 is a big plus for indoors IMO. But it's your choice of course... Don't drink too much in front of kids. Peace!

@DamianFL: yes, the "near eye", but sometimes the far eye catches more light.

All this bokeh babble. Choose your background and lighting right, get in close, get the near eye in focus, choose f2.0 or 2.8, and this lens but some others as well will do great.

@Bildsee: yes, a portrait with only one eye in focus can make sense, as in being very forceful. I made some today, hope they're forceful.

Bildsee: the forcefulness - obviously - would not be in the out-of-focus eye but in the in-focus eye. Anyway, the forcefulness, in my opinion, derives from the extreme emphasis on one eye, hopefully catching the light as well.

If the subject's head is turned three quarters towards the camera, frame filling distance, even f4.0 won't get both eyes in focus. #79 is a full frontal, and I, in that case, would have opted (as I usually do; f2.0 or f2.8) for stopping down slightly, getting both eyes in focus.

Although... using my 50/1.2AiS wide open recently was good fun and resulted in some good close-up portraits.

Disagreeing ain't necessarily a bad thing!

@Bildsee: Have a look at Vanfleteren's portrait of f.i. Roger de Vlaeminck, and you may see my point. You may or may not like the image, but I think there's no denying the impact.

b&w images of roger de vlaeminck

@Mike I thorougly looked at the portraits. Needless to say that b&w is perfect for portraits. It always was. They are very good and I see what you mean. Nevertheless the effect - only one eye in focus - seems worn off to me after the 3rd or 4th portrait. Even more important after a while looking at the pictures the blurred eye somehow always reminds me of a blinded eye. I think this is why I do not like this approach. So I think we agree that we disagree :-)

focal length has nothing to do with elongated noses or flatten face... that has to do with sensor plane to subject distance. The preferred distance is roughly 8-12 feet. Get in that range then pick the focal length you need to frame it the way you want

or you stand back 10' and pick the focal length you need then pick the aperture you need for how much you want in focus.

I honestly feel a 40-140 would be much more epic.

I would consider switching if the focusing is more reliable on the Sigma.
I absolutely love the look of the 85L, but the focussing is so unreliable particularly at 1.2. If I take 3 shots in succession - refocussing on a non-movable subject - none of the shots will have identical focus result. It's a liability using this lens at weddings. Where other lenses allow me to take one snap per scene, I have to click away multiple times to ensure at least one of them is in focus. You simply never know if the shot is going to be sharp. And no - the lens is not faulty - I tried 2 other 85L's and they all have the same "trait". Shooing with 5d MKIII

Or use Zebrapeaking with Magic Lantern...

It is a rangefinder just as contax G2 is a rangefinder. It is electronic

Not feeling ok today? need some thing to calm down the nerves, perhaps?

This is a perfect example how the Camera (Mirror) shake destroy the Image under 1/250 sec. in 85mm focal length. Sorry for bad English :)
By the way the Lens looks good: Contrast, Sharpness and nice Bokeh!

I'm talking about Camera Mirror Shake. In this situation tripod or remote release can not help. Only with the LiveView or Mirror Lockup is possible to take absolutely sharp and shake-free Images.

lots.

like whether Sigma is on the right track.

Whether it can focus in dim light?