Thanks Nathan :-)

Him and Christopher Frost are my favorites.

It's an awesome lens for bokeh, no doubt about that, and it's actually better on mirrorless, IMHO, since the direct focusing is more reliable with that shallow depth of field.

Glad you liked it :-)

Thanks, John, glad you find them useful!

Same!

Thanks!

Dxomark shows Sigma transmission at 1.8 and canon at 1.5

Hey David, Glad you liked it :-) Yes, this video was my first attempt at using chunks of previous videos as templates to speed up production, and it led to all sorts of errors like that. I fixed some of them and re-published the video (which is where the (fixed) part of the title came from, but I didn't catch everything. Back when this was published, KZfaq had a feature that allowed me to overlay the correct camera names, so I didn't need to upload a new copy, but that feature has since been disabled. Oh well :-) You probably got the general idea.

Matthew Gore - Thanks for answering back so quickly:) Yup, got the idea right away! I’m sold either way. Please keep the content coming if you can. Between you and Mark Bone, I’ll be up and running in no time. Thanks again Matt!✨

its not for landscape

Hey Josh, glad you found it useful :-) Enjoy the new lens!

Reggie Brown I actually think Christopher Frost's testing of resolution leaves something to be desired. He takes one frame at a certain focal length and f-stop, and judges both center and corner sharpness from that same image, without refocusing for the corners. So if he tests a lens that has field curvature, that lens may actually be capable of better resolution than his results show.

wrong

Thanks James! It was a fun one to make :-)

Oh and I'm from Seattle as well! www.nakean.com

I see. It looks like this is something that I'll need to explain in a future video... my fault. There are several reasons that I use landscapes for testing sharpness. First, it's more interesting than using a test chart (and the subject doesn't matter for sharpness as long as there is detail to compare). Second, models move. This makes comparisons impractical for a couple of reasons: first, they can introduce motion blur into the image, and second, if they've moved it makes the images different in composition, and thus harder to compare. Third, many lenses exhibit field curvature to some degree or another, so different parts of the image may be sharper with different lenses, and it's not always obvious to people who are comparing the images whether a particular area is blurry purely because of its resolving power or because of field curvature. Consequently, I shoots test shots that are beyond both lenses "infinity" focus setting, where field curvature is not a significant issue. If I were focusing on a model who is much closer, then I'd also run into the problem of matching focus points. If I were to focus on the near eye of the subject but in one case the focus is perfectly on the eye surface and the other case it's on the eye-lashes (or somewhere in between), and we're talking about the depth of field that you get at f/1.2 or 1.4, then this can cause a significant difference in the appearance of sharpness in the rest of the face, and again, the cause for that may be unclear when simply viewing the images. So, these are a few of the reasons that I shoot landscapes for these tests. Ultimately, some people will prefer some lenses for reasons other than resolution, contrast, distortion, vignetting (etc.) characteristics. I frequently hear people say that one lens or another has a certain ineffable quality to it... a magic or emotion or whatever. Those things, however, are subjective by nature, and I can't reasonably compare them... so I'll compare what I CAN compare. And of course it makes no difference to me which lens people prefer... I'm only here to show you some information about the lenses, I'm not selling them, and I have no stake in the matter. That said, it's much easier to add a bit of barrel distortion and softness into a sharp image than it is to get more resolution out of a soft one.

Matthew Gore , perhaps I have been more critical than I intended. For that, I apologize. I realize that you and others that do these lens tests are just trying to help people and there is probably no good way to set up the perfect test. I just get a bit frustrated with the focus on sharpness (not just you as most lens reviewers do so as well. For example, the Canon 24MM-105MM f4 ver 1 has a reputation among lens reviewers as not having the best sharpness. When I take a portrait with it, the person's face is plenty sharp. If it were sharper, you would see every pore and minor blemish on the person's face. I read an interview with a Nikon optical engineer in which he discussed the challenges in optical design and trade-offs that much be considered. To a question about vignetting, he said he could design lenses without vignetting, but there would a trade-off somewhere else, such as color saturation, contrast, price, etc. So, in the end, one's preference will depend on what you value in a photograph. As far as that Sigma is concerned, I would not buy it even if I liked the images it produced. A 50MM lens that is about 5 inches long is just wrong!

Mark Nakib Thanks Mark! You're one of 8 people who have supported my channel since I've started accepting fan funding. It's an elite group :) And it's already been a big help... I'm working on my next video now. All my gratitude - Matt

Well, personally, you've had a hand in 3 lens purchases already for me. You've saved me probably over $1000, so it's the least I can do. I wish I had more than $5 to give but I'll try to keep it coming in the future as long as you keep putting out such quality stuff.

Hi Vincent, I'd love to do more of these... they just take a long time to make, and since I don't really make any money from them, it's hard to justify spending all of the time :-) I am making more, though... just generally have to stick with more popular lenses. I'll see about starting a Patreon page or something, maybe I can expand a bit.

Matthew Gore I understand.

curious as to why you felt the need to state where you're from.

+Pradhyumna Gupta I wanted to tell him that his channel is familiar for people all around the world 🙂..

Glad it was helpful!

From the weight/size of the R-mount, and the new design (not to mention the price), I'd guess that the Canon will be markedly better. Better for bokeh, anyway, and better in overall resolution, but I don't know if anyone really cares about better resolution in this case :-)