Sony’s new 50-150mm F2 GM has created a lot of buzz for being the first full frame zoom to reach to 150mm with a constant maximum aperture of F2. Tamron was the first genre boosting zoom like this back in 2021, coupling a bigger zoom range (35-150mm) with a variable aperture of F2-F2.8. Is the premium G Master lens worth twice as much, however? We’re going to go head to head to find out.
The Sony GM lens was loaned to me by Sony Canada, and the Tamron is my own personal lens purchased in 2021. As always, this is a completely independent review. *The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done with my Sony a7RV or Sony Alpha 1 cameras.You can find the product page for the Tamron 35-150mm VXD here.
Both have thorough weather sealing (gasket, seals, fluorine)
Both can do smooth aperture racks
Both have issues with flare, particularly on the telephoto end
Neutral Differences
White lens vs black lens debate
Reasons to Choose TAMRON:
Much, much cheaper ($1699 vs $3898)
Bigger zoom range
Much smaller 89.2 vs 158mm vs 102.8 x 200mm (about 32% less volume)
Lighter (1165 vs 1340g)
82 vs 85mm filters
Slightly less fringing
Rounder bokeh balls
Sometimes nicer rendering (at 150mm)
Personally prefer Tamron colors
Reasons to Choose GM
Faster maximum aperture (Tamron F2.2 by 50mm, F2.8 by 85mm)
Higher magnification (0.20x vs 0.18x)
Much better aperture control
Better build
Internal zoom
Tripod foot
11 vs 9 aperture blades
Quad XD linear vs single VXD
Less focus breathing
More shallow depth of field
More consistently sharp
Better contrast
Baked in Sony perks (faster burst, focus breathing compensation)
Conclusion
These are similar lenses in some ways and very different in others. If you own the Tamron already and mostly use it for portraits or events, it may not be worth spending the significant amount of money to upgrade. If you are going to shoot action or sports (particularly professionally), the Sony makes all kinds of sense. The Sony is the better lens in a lot of ways, but more than 2x better? My opinion is that it really depends on what you plan to do with it.
Keywords: Sony 50-150mm, Tamron 35-150mm, Sony 50-150 GM, 50-150 F2, Sony FE 50-150mm F2 GM, Tamron 35-150 VXD, 50-150mm, GM, Sony 50-150 GM Review, Sony 50-150mm Review, Sony FE 50-150mm F2 GM Review, Full Frame, Review, Sony Alpha 1, Sony a7RV, Review, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Bokeh, Flare Resistance, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Photography, let the light in, weathersealing, #letthelightin, DA
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
I noted in last year’s review of the Nikkor Z 50mm F1.4 that Nikon’s marketing strategy at the typical prime focal lengths (35mm, 50mm, and 85mm) is a bit unconventional. In the past the usual strategy was entry level (F1.8), mid-tier (F1.4), and premium (F1.2) options. But Nikon actually released F1.8 lenses at these focal lengths first, but rather than the typical entry level “plastic fantastics” they actually created more premium mid-tier options included in their premium S-line lineup. They then followed those up with F1.2 options (large, expensive, and excellent), and only then created F1.4 options. The F1.4 lenses are actually the least expensive options, and, ironically, tend to be about the same size as the F1.8 S lenses. But thanks to a newfound connection at Nikon Canada (thanks, Chris!), I’ve got an opportunity to work through some of the catalog lenses in Z mount. I’ve been very interested in seeing how the F1.8 S lenses compare to the newer F1.4 lenses, so I’m starting that journey by reviewing the Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8 S, and I’ll follow that up with a review and article directly comparing it to the 50mm F1.4. Sound interesting? Find out my thoughts by watching the video review, reading the text review, or just enjoying the photos in the gallery below.
Thanks to Nikon Canada for sending me a review copy of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. All opinions and conclusions are my own. *The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done with the 45MP Nikon Z8, which I reviewed here.You can visit the product page for the Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8 S here.
I actually really liked the Nikkor Z 50mm F1.4 and ended up purchasing one myself from Camera Canada. I’ll be using my own copy of that lens for some of the comparisons in these reviews. What’s interesting is just how similar in size these two lenses are. The F1.8 lens is about 2.5mm shorter and weighs 7g less, but let’s just say that it wouldn’t be difficult to confuse the two lenses.
The 50mm F1.8 S has been a great seller for Nikon, and that’s in part because this approach allowed photographers to have an S-Line lens that they could afford…and that wouldn’t mind carrying. The 50mm F1.8 S weighs 416g; the premium F1.2 S weighs a whopping 1090g! Many “ordinary” photographers aren’t interested in paying for or carrying around a lens like the F1.2 S, so that has made the F1.8 S lens the sweet spot for many buyers. I’m curious how the F1.4 lens released in 2024 has impacted sales of the F1.8 S. Has Nikon done a good enough job of marketing the S-Line advantages to the casual buyer, or will they see the F1.4 aperture and lower price of the newer lens and pull that level instead? We tackle that question and others in the reviews if you want more info. For now, just enjoy the photos in the galleries.
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
I noted in last year’s review of the Nikkor Z 50mm F1.4 that Nikon’s marketing strategy at the typical prime focal lengths (35mm, 50mm, and 85mm) is a bit unconventional. In the past the usual strategy was entry level (F1.8), mid-tier (F1.4), and premium (F1.2) options. But Nikon actually released F1.8 lenses at these focal lengths first, but rather than the typical entry level “plastic fantastics” they actually created more premium mid-tier options included in their premium S-line lineup. They then followed those up with F1.2 options (large, expensive, and excellent), and only then created F1.4 options. The F1.4 lenses are actually the least expensive options, and, ironically, tend to be about the same size as the F1.8 S lenses. But thanks to a newfound connection at Nikon Canada (thanks, Chris!), I’ve got an opportunity to work through some of the catalog lenses in Z mount. I’ve been very interested in seeing how the F1.8 S lenses compare to the newer F1.4 lenses, so I’m starting that journey by reviewing the Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8 S, and I’ll follow that up with a review and article directly comparing it to the 50mm F1.4. Sound interesting? Find out my thoughts by watching the video review or by reading on in the text review.
Thanks to Nikon Canada for sending me a review copy of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. All opinions and conclusions are my own. *The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done with the 45MP Nikon Z8, which I reviewed here.You can visit the product page for the Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8 S here.
I actually really liked the Nikkor Z 50mm F1.4 and ended up purchasing one myself from Camera Canada. I’ll be using my own copy of that lens for some of the comparisons in these reviews. What’s interesting is just how similar in size these two lenses are. The F1.8 lens is about 2.5mm shorter and weighs 7g less, but let’s just say that it wouldn’t be difficult to confuse the two lenses.
The 50mm F1.8 S has been a great seller for Nikon, and that’s in part because this approach allowed photographers to have an S-Line lens that they could afford…and that wouldn’t mind carrying. The 50mm F1.8 S weighs 416g; the premium F1.2 S weighs a whopping 1090g! Many “ordinary” photographers aren’t interested in paying for or carrying around a lens like the F1.2 S, so that has made the F1.8 S lens the sweet spot for many buyers. I’m curious how the F1.4 lens released in 2024 has impacted sales of the F1.8 S. Has Nikon done a good enough job of marketing the S-Line advantages to the casual buyer, or will they see the F1.4 aperture and lower price of the newer lens and pull that level instead?
This is not a new lens. It was one of the first released by Nikon when Z mount launched in late 2018, so is it sill holding up to scrutiny over six years later?
Nikkor 50mm F1.8 S Build and Handling
Though this is the smallest of the three traditional 50mm options available from Nikon on Z-mount (excluding a macro option), it isn’t actually small…particularly for an F1.8 lens. Nikon’s Z-mount is the largest diameter of the three major full frame players at 55mm, with Canon’s RF mount right behind at 54mm, but Sony’s E-mount is a much smaller 46.1mm. There are definite advantages for Nikon with their larger mount diameter, but the downside is that lenses tend to be a little bigger because the diameter of the lens even at the mount starts a bit larger. Sony has proven to be the most efficient of the three in creating smaller, more compact premium lenses, but that is aided by having that smaller diameter to start with. The 50mm F1.8 S is 76mm (2.99″) x 86.5 mm (3.41″) in length.
It weighs in at a moderate 415g or 14.64oz. The outer barrel is made of a robust polycarbonate material with some metal components, including the mount. There is a weather sealing gasket at the mount along with internal seals throughout the lens.
I count either 6 or 7 seal points overall in this diagram. Nikon’s language around the weather sealing is a little more confident for the S-Line lens than it was for the Z 50mm F1.4. They say, “Extensively sealed against dust and moisture, especially around all moving parts of the barrel.” (Emphasis mine). On paper the 50mm F1.4 and the 50mm F1.8 S have similar weather sealing, but Nikon seems to be indicating that the sealing is more robust in the S-line lens. As with the 50mm F1.4, however, the gasket is pretty thin at the lens mount.
The feature set of the 50mm F1.8 S is fairly brief. There is an AF | MF switch along with the S-Line badging near the lens mount (*my Nikon Professional Services loaner has stickers all over the place, so these won’t be the prettiest product shots I’ve ever produced!)
There is just a single ring on the lens barrel. This is an area of differentiation from the newer 50mm F1.4, as that lens has two rings. It has a dedicated manual focus ring along with Nikon’s customizable control ring that can be assigned to adjust aperture, exposure compensation, or ISO. In this case, however, the single ring is the customizable control ring, meaning that manual focus is the default function but is also just one of the potential uses for the ring.
This leaves me with a bit of quandary, as I do like having an aperture ring, but I also really like Nikon’s full time manual override and do find it often necessary when autofocus doesn’t want to grab a close object. The shot below found autofocus stuck on the background and I had to use manual override to pull focus to the right zone where autofocus can take over. I would give the win to the newer F1.4 lens for having a separate control ring, as I decided that I would just have to skip the manual aperture control in order to retain manual focus override.
The feel of the ring is fairly good, with good damping and precision. I like Nikon’s options for controlling the behavior of the manual focus ring, allowing you to choose a linear response and your desired focus throw distance.
The aperture iris is made up of nine rounded blades, allowing for a circular aperture shape when the lens is stopped down.
As you stop the aperture down, the overall shape is “roundish” but you can slightly see the shape of the aperture blades (F1.8, F2.8, and F4 shown below).
The front filter size is a relatively uncommon 62mm, though Nikon is making it more common by equipping the 50mm F1.4 along with both the 35mm F1.8 and F1.4 options with a 62mm filter thread. The 85mm F1.8 S moves up to a 67mm filter size.
There is a fairly deep lens hood included. There are ribs inside and a ridged grip section to make it easier to mount/unmount the lens. My loaner copy didn’t include the hood, though I found that the one on my 50mm F1.4 looked very similar to the one shown in the photos and mounted fine.
The 50mm F1.8 S lags behind the F1.4 lenses a bit in minimum focus distance. It can only focus as closely as 40cm while the 50mm F1.4 can focus down to 37.19cm. This means the maximum magnification is reduced from 0.17x (on the F1.4 lens) to 0.15x here. That’s about average for a 50mm lens, and the 50mm F1.2 S shares that specification. Here’s what MFD looks like:
While the F1.4 does have a higher degree of magnification, it produces a much poorer end result, with less contrast and a plane of focus that isn’t particularly flat. The 50mm F1.8 S does a much better job.
I’m not sure that you’d be able to tell that the 50mm F1.8 S is the premium lens when just visually comparing the 50mm F1.8 and 50mm F1.4 lenses. It adds the AF | MF switch but loses the separate control ring, and while there are a few more metal bits on the S Line lens (it does have slightly better build), the build materials don’t feel radically different. Add in that both lenses are roughly the same size and weight, and you end up needing to use other criteria to differentiate the two lenses in your buying decision. The current price of the 50mm F1.8 S is about $630, while the 50mm F1.4 will cost about $500. You’ll have to decide if the S-Line approach is worth more to you than the newer, brighter lens.
Autofocus for Stills
Like the 50mm F1.4, the 50mm F1.8 S utilizes a stepping focus motor (STM) that is, for the most part, surprisingly fast. Focus changes happen very quickly whether indoors or outdoors, and most of the time you won’t think about autofocus at all because the job just gets done quickly and efficiently. I was able to track action sequences with good accuracy on a squash court shooting at F1.8 (despite shooting through glass). I shot bursts at 20FPS on my Z8 and got nearly perfectly focused long bursts.
I had very good results when shooting “people pictures”, with beautiful focus on the eyes.
My one complaint with walkaround focus is a fairly typical one with lenses on my Z8; 3D Focus (my typical focus mode) doesn’t love picking up close objects when the background is fairly complex…even if I put the default box/point right on the out of focus contrast edge of the subject. This is something that Sony and Canon seem to do a bit better with. What helps, however, is that Nikon’s full time manual override works in all modes…including AF-C, so it is easy to pull focus back where I want it and then let the AF do its thing.
There is a faint “schnick” sound if you put your ear right next to the lens barrel, but if I held the camera at chest level and racked focus here and there, I couldn’t hear anything. Focus speed in my formal tests was not instant but was nice and fast racking back and forth.
I’ve got no concerns for autofocus for stills.
Video Autofocus
Though some training with my new Nikon insider I’ve learned that tweaking the focus settings in G6 and G7 of my Z8’s menu will affect the speed and sensitivity of focus with on screen subjects but not the touch to focus process that I use for my video focus pulls. This helps explain the variance I’ve sometimes seen between this test and my “hand test” detailed below.
My first test was video focus pulls, and I saw quick and reasonably confident pulls from one subject to another in my standard test. I didn’t see any visible steps from the STM motor. What I did see was a bit of micropulsing where it felt like focus had perhaps slightly overshot the target and pulsed back. You will see a periodic quick rack in the wrong direction, which is another thing that I’ve seen in all of my Nikon tests thus far. That means that this is more of a camera/focus system issue than a lens specific issue.
Focus breathing felt fairly well controlled, but Nikon does have a focus breathing compensation setting that does help with that.
My “hand test” where I alternately block the camera’s view of my face with my hand and then remove it has improved through tweaking the settings I’ve mentioned before. I will now keep these new settings as the standard settings so that I have a baseline for all future Nikon reviews. I’ve found that I needed to nearly maximize speed and sensitivity settings to get the kind of result I was looking for, but I was pleased with the result I got in my test here.
I had very good results when walking towards the camera, with consistent tracking of my face, and when I ducked out of frame and then back in, the lens was relatively quick in picking me back up.
I’ve shot a number of short clips with the 50mm F1.8 S and had solid, reliable focus results.
All told there is a lot to like here in the autofocus performance. I never get too excited when I see “STM” under the focus motor description, but this is a solid implementation of STM.
Image Quality Breakdown
The Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8S is an FX (full frame lens), though it can also be used on DX cameras where it will give a full frame equivalent of 75mm due to the 1.5x crop factor on DX. This is a more complex optical design than the F1.4 lens, with 12 elements in 9 groups, including one aspherical element. This is clearly not the same optical design as their older DSLR era AF-S 50mm F1.4, which had 8 elements in 7 groups. The MTF chart shows a very even performance across the frame with only a slight drop in the extreme corners.
The difference in the design philosophy for the two lenses can be easily seen if we compare the MTF charts. I like to line up MTF charts and put a line through the 80% threshold. Anything above that at 30lp/mm will look extremely sharp.
You can see that the S-Line lens has a lot of its performance either above or just slightly below that threshold, while the 50mm F1.4 lens is considerably softer. If pure sharpness is your priority, the S-Line lens definitely wins on paper.
Out in the real world, I found a very, very different philosophy between the design of these two lenses. The newer 50mm F1.4 follows more of a classic design philosophy. It’s less corrected, lower contrast, but I continue to think it has a nice rendering. The S Line lens has much higher contrast and is a much sharper at similar apertures. Take a look at my classic lock that I use as a subject for many of my reviews.
That’s a radically different result. Here’s a look at result from the 50mm F1.8 S.
That’s an intense amount of contrast and detail, and that, to me, really defines the character of this lens.
You’ll also see it in the approach to correcting LoCA (longitudinal chromatic aberrations), which show up as fringing before or after the plane of focus. The 50mm F1.4 shows not only the fringing but also the loss of contrast that comes as a byproduct.
You can see how well corrected the S Line lens is by comparison. So, as expected, when we go to the test charts we won’t really see any fringing.
Lateral chromatic aberrations near the edge of the frame are essentially non-existent, so that won’t be a problem.
Sometimes highly corrected lenses like this will suffer in terms of their bokeh and overall rendering, so we’ll revisit that in a while to see if there are negative consequences that come from the corrections.
If we move on to vignette and distortion we find a tiny amount of barrel distortion which required just a +2 to correct for. It is both minimal and linear, so it corrects fine but would also be fine uncorrected in almost every application.
Vignette is another story. I had to add a +71 to correct for the vignette. That’s not as bad as the 50mm F1.4, but it isn’t great! The correction profile is able to make a clean correction of the vignette, though I will note any lens with high levels of vignette will result in some less clean corners when shooting at higher ISO values.
We’ll move on to inspecting our test chart. This test has been done on a 45MP Nikon Z8 sensor. I use a high end tripod and two second camera delay to ensure vibration doesn’t affect images. Here’s a look at the test chart that we will examine at high magnification:
If we take a look at crops (at roughly 200%) at F1.8 from the center, mid-frame, and lower right corner, we see a very strong center and mid-frame (contrast is a standout), with a bit of fade very close to the edge of the frame.
What stood out to me above all was the really impressive contrast. It also has an Apochromatic look. I often shoot on this fallen jack pine because the lichen covered cones really challenge a lens’ ability to produce good contrast. Often you’ll see fringing and blooming on the textures because of high contrast transitions along with the complication of subject matter with a lot of depth. The 50mm F1.8 S kills it on this shot, with amazing microcontrast, no fringing, and extremely crisp delineation of details even at a pixel level.
If we zoom in to the pixel level, we see that the subject looks nice and crisp.
This gives you a lot of versatility to challenge challenging, high contrast scenes and trust that you are still going to get images that hold up under careful examination.
Let me give you an excellent case in point. I took this shot of a new emerging buds on a tree with intense evening backlighting. This is a scene loaded with potential image destroying elements. Intense backlight brings the risk of flare or ghosting, bright light coming through fine, filament like subjects gives the perfect recipe for fringing and a loss of contrast. The image looks fine when viewed globally…
…but it looks great when viewed at high percentage levels, as you basically need to view it at 100% to appreciate just how well the S Line lens is handling the very difficult subject in the narrow depth of field.
If you’re a fan of monochrome images with intense contrast, that’s very easy to achieve here.
Surprisingly, a mild stopdown to F2 creates a noticeable improvement to contrast.
Whereas I classified the sharpness at wide apertures “enough” in my review of the 50mm F1.4 Z, I would call the sharpness of the 50mm F1.8 S intensely good.
Stopping down further can essentially be reserved for two scenarios: 1) to increase depth of field or 2) to achieve maximal corner sharpness. It’s at F4 where corner sharpness becomes impressively good.
High contrast lenses like this are really fantastic for landscape images because they produce really inky black levels and well saturated colors. Here’s a case in point.
That image just wouldn’t look as good from a less corrected lens. There are just certain situations where a only a high contrast lens produces the kinds of images you want.
Expect the typical diffraction pattern on high resolution cameras where the image is a little softer by F11 and softer still at the minimum aperture of F16, though frankly I’ve seen much worse when it comes to diffraction.
Sharpness and contrast are nothing short of fantastic on the Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8 S – even six years after release!
I noted in my review of the Z 50mm F1.4 that one tradeoff for some uncorrected fringing can be a softer background. Often lenses with a little less contrast and a little more fringing are able to produce softer, more pleasing backgrounds. We’ve determined that the S Line lens is certainly more corrected…so does that come at the cost of softly blurred backgrounds and pleasing bokeh?
First we’ll look at specular highlights (bokeh balls).
We see an immediate advantage for the F1.4 lens – a lens with a larger maximum aperture is always going to produce larger, softer specular highlights than a lens with a smaller aperture because those specular highlights will be more out of focus. This is a byproduct of the shallower depth of field.
Lets zoom in a bit and take a closer look:
There’s some give and take here. The 50mm F1.8 S loses points for not only having smaller bokeh balls but also having more busyness inside them. There’s also an inner line or membrane that is lacking on the 50mm F1.4 Z. But the cheaper lens also has fairly pronounced fringing on the specular highlights that the better corrected 50mm F1.8 S doesn’t have. The winner is going to the lens whose flaws you find less objectionable.
What’s interesting (and that many photographers don’t know) is that the larger aperture lens will maintain some advantage even when the two lenses are stopped down to equal settings. If I stop the F1.4 lens down to F1.8, it still has larger specular highlights.
In this case, however, that advantage fades by about F2, where the two lenses equal out.
How about the rendering without specular highlights? That’s just one aspect of bokeh. We’ll start with a scene that I know will render well (a lot of depth, not too many hard edges, etc…)
The results are somewhat surprising. Yes, where there are specular highlights, they are larger and softer on the F1.4 lens (at F1.4), but frankly I don’t see a lot of difference overall in the two images.
What’s more, while we all know by this point that the microcontrast on the F1.8 S is far and away better at a pixel level, when viewing at this global level the F1.4 lens doesn’t look like it has lower contrast levels.
In another unexpected twist, I found that when I stopped the F1.4 lens down to F1.8, that I actually felt like the F1.8 S did a better job of managing the defocused areas nearer the edge of the frame. The F1.4 lens looks a little jittery.
That was unexpected.
In this second series I chose a more complex background with a lot of hard edges and a less preferential ratio of distance to the subject and then to the background.
This was another example that gave both an expected and unexpected result. On a global level the lower contrast of the F1.4 lens actually works here, making the background appear a little less dominant in the shot. When I zoom into the defocused area in most of the frame, the two lenses are very similar. But it was on the edge that I found the S Line advantage once again.
It reminds me of the design philosophy around the Nikkor Z 135mm F1.8 S Plena (my review here); a point of emphasis for Nikon’s engineers was to really work on the outer portion of the image. They took advantage of the bigger mount (and building a bigger lens) to allow them to have more consistent shading and performance in the corners. The 50mm F1.8 S doesn’t go quite to that limit (it also costs a third as much), but its clear that Nikon’s engineers did work along the edges of the frame to improve the rendering.
My chief concerns going into this review was that 1) the S Line lens wouldn’t have held up well being older, and thus wouldn’t look extra sharp compared to the newer F1.4 lens and 2) the rendering wouldn’t be as nice as an F1.4 lens. Neither of those things proved to be true. I think the rendering from the F1.8 S is just as nice as the newer lens.
There are going to be times that an F1.8 lens won’t look as defocused as what I would like, but in many situations the bokeh is just generally very nice.
Flare resistance was generally pretty good, though I could pick up a little flashing if the sun or light source was right out of frame (it’s a little easier to demonstrate in video).
Ordinary flare resistance was pretty good, however, with minimal amounts of ghosting blobs or loss of contrast.
Color more impressed. This lens is better than I expected, particularly considering how long its been around. I was impressed with the images I was able to produce with the lens. It feels like an easy lens to reach for those family moments you want to capture, for walking around when you feel like shooting 50mm, and for portrait work in this range.
I still can’t say that Nikon’s overall marketing strategy with their primes at key focal lengths makes sense, at least in a conventional way, but I can at least understand why they did the original S Line F1.8 primes. F1.8 is not a typical maximum aperture for any premium lens save perhaps an ultra wide angle or a longer telephoto like a 135mm, but Nikon chose to make some lenses that could be both premium in performance and reasonable in price. If they’d made F1.4 lenses, they almost certainly would have priced more like Canon or Sony’s F1.4 primes. This way a lot of people could afford a higher end lens, even if the maximum aperture wasn’t particularly sexy.
And, at least as far as the Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8 S goes, the performance is pretty sexy. It is incredibly sharp and contrasty and retains a very nice rendering even if the depth of field isn’t as shallow as a faster lens. If you want to go crazy, there’s the Nikkor Z 50mm F1.2 S…but you’ll be spending a whopping $2100 to get it and have to tote around a nearly 1100g 50mm lens.
The 50mm F1.4 Z is actually less of a threat than I expected it to be. Nikon did a good job of leaving a lot of daylight between the two lenses in terms of performance, so I think the three main advantages of the 50mm F1.4 Z are the lower price, brighter maximum aperture, and having a separate control ring. But the 50mm F1.8 S does win basically every other metric. It’s much sharper and better corrected, has slightly better autofocus, and manages to even render slightly better. It’s probably the best 50mm F1.8 lens that I’ve ever tested. I suspect the main challenge will come from a company like Viltrox, who will have a 50mm F2 from their AIR series, a 50mm F1.4 from their PRO series, and a 50mm F1.2 from their LAB series on Z mount probably by this time next year, and surely one of those lenses will be fairly competitive. I’ve wondered at times why people seem to love this lens so much, as on paper it isn’t particularly impressive. But now that I’ve used it, I get it. This is a great lens, and still well worth considering in 2025 (particularly when it goes on sale!)
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
I’ve owned the Sony 35mm F1.4 GM for about four years, and I think it is one of the best 35mm lenses ever made. It’s small and compact, focuses quickly, has great optics, and even has great magnification. The Viltrox LAB 35mm F1.2 is the new heavyweight, however, with even more features, quad focus motors, incredible optics…and a price tag that comes at a full $400 less (even cheaper with code DA3512LAB5). Both lenses have unique advantages relative to the other…so which is today’s champion? Let’s dive in and find out.
I purchased the Sony GM lens from retail about three years ago and the LAB lens was provided to me for this review by Viltrox. As always, this is a completely independent review. *The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done with my Sony a7RV or Sony Alpha 1 cameras.
Professional grade build quality with thorough weather sealing
Mostly similar feature set (Aperture ring, AF | MF, Function)
About equal coma performance
Flare resistance
Neutral Differences
Different approach to aperture (I prefer traditional)
Reasons to Choose LAB:
Price (currently $999 ($949 with discount), so -$450
Faster maximum aperture
Better light transmission
Bigger, softer specular highlights
More customizable – LCD screen allows you to set A – B focus, App, extra function button)
LCD screen shows distance scale
Quad vs Dual focus motors
Bigger, softer bokeh
Sharper center, mid-frame, (corners by F1.4)
Consistently better contrast
Reasons to Choose GM
Much lighter at 525g (395g less than LAB [920g])
Much smaller (13mm diameter and -25mm in length)
Much higher magnification level
Can do smooth aperture racks
Manually focuses smoother
Faster burst rate and focus breathing compensation*
Less fringing (wide open)
Less complex distortion | slightly lower vignette
Sharper wide open corners
Conclusion
My findings were pretty remarkable. The Sony gets high mark for being such a high performing lens in such a compact package, while the Viltrox gets high marks for basically being better optically at F1.2 than the GM is at F1.4. What’s more, the Viltrox gets even higher marks for being probably the fastest focusing 35mm F1.2 lens the world has seen, giving us even faster AF than the GM at F1.4. Go with the GM if you want to keep things light or if you don’t trust third party lenses. Go with the LAB if you want to save $400+ or if you want that extra bit of “special sauce” that an F1.2 lens brings..
Keywords: Viltrox AF 35mm F1.2 LAB FE, Sony FE 35mm F1.4 GM, 35mm GM, Viltrox AF, LAB, Viltrox LAB, #LAB, #LAB35, #explorebeyond, Viltrox 35mm, Normal, Full Frame, F1.2, f/1.2, Hyper VCM, Viltrox LAB 35mm F1.2 FE, Viltrox LAB 35mm Review, Viltrox AF 35mm F1.2 FE Review, Sony a7IV, Sony Alpha 1, Sony a7RV, Review, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Bokeh, Flare Resistance, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Photography, let the light in, weathersealing, #letthelightin, DA
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
I had the privilege in late February to be in Japan for Sigma’s announcement of a three new products along with some new branding initiatives. My favorite of those announcements was the 300-600mm F4 DG OS | SPORT lens. Sigma had yet to release a true “super-telephoto” on FE and L mounts, and this one is exciting. It’s a big lens (167mm in diameter and 467.9mm in length) and weighs nearly 4 kilos (3985g), but it also delivers a constant F4 aperture all the way through 600mm, which puts it into very rare company. The Sony, Canon, and Nikon 600mm F4 lenses on their respective platforms all costs $13,000 USD or more ($14,000 for the Nikon), while the Sigma offers the versatility of being a zoom and also comes at a price tag of right under $6000 USD. But is the performance of this new 300-600 Sport make it worthy of inclusion with the best from the big brands? I try to answer that question in my video review and text review, or you can just enjoy the photos from the big lens in the galleries.
Thanks to Sigma Canada (Gentec) for sending me a review loaner of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. *The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done with the Sony a7RV along with the Sony Alpha 1 that serve as my benchmark cameras for Sony lenses. You can visit the product page for the Sigma 300-600mm F4 SPORT here.
Don’t plan on being discrete with this one. People are going to KNOW when this big white is pointed at them.
This lens seems to have it all, including the premium HLA focus motor for sports work, an effective 5.5 stop OS2 stabilization system, and a huge amount of controls, including a drop in filter system including the ability to rotate circular polarizers. I noted and tested the ability to preset focus positions where a new unique control ring can be rocked and instantly return focus to the preset position – great for sports like baseball, for example.
As a Sports lens, it has Sigma’s premium build quality, including a magnesium alloy body and carbon fiber lens hood and completed with a thorough weather sealing. It’s also Sigma’s first white super telephoto lens, and it looks beautiful.
Keywords: Sigma 300-600mm, DG, SPORT, SPORTS, Sigma 300-600 Sport, Sigma 300-600mm F4, Sigma 300-600mm F4 DG OS Sport, Sigma 300-600 Review, #SIGMAEmount, #SIGMA #SIGMA300600mmF4Sport, #SIGMASport, #SIGMASPORTS, Full Frame, Review, Sony Alpha 1, Sony a7RV, Review, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Bokeh, Flare Resistance, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Photography, let the light in, weathersealing, #letthelightin, DA
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
I had the privilege in late February to be in Japan for Sigma’s announcement of a three new products along with some new branding initiatives. My favorite of those announcements was the 300-600mm F4 DG OS | SPORT lens. Sigma had yet to release a true “super-telephoto” on FE and L mounts, and this one is exciting. It’s a big lens (167mm in diameter and 467.9mm in length) and weighs nearly 4 kilos (3985g), but it also delivers a constant F4 aperture all the way through 600mm, which puts it into very rare company. The Sony, Canon, and Nikon 600mm F4 lenses on their respective platforms all costs $13,000 USD or more ($14,000 for the Nikon), while the Sigma offers the versatility of being a zoom and also comes at a price tag of right under $6000 USD. But is the performance of this new 300-600 Sport make it worthy of inclusion with the best from the big brands? We’ll explore that question in either my video review below or in the text review that follows.
Thanks to Sigma Canada (Gentec) for sending me a review loaner of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. *The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done with the Sony a7RV along with the Sony Alpha 1 that serve as my benchmark cameras for Sony lenses. You can visit the product page for the Sigma 300-600mm F4 SPORT here.
Don’t plan on being discrete with this one. People are going to KNOW when this big white is pointed at them.
This lens seems to have it all, including the premium HLA focus motor for sports work, an effective 5.5 stop OS2 stabilization system, and a huge amount of controls, including a drop in filter system including the ability to rotate circular polarizers. I noted and tested the ability to preset focus positions where a new unique control ring can be rocked and instantly return focus to the preset position – great for sports like baseball, for example.
As a Sports lens, it has Sigma’s premium build quality, including a magnesium alloy body and carbon fiber lens hood and completed with a thorough weather sealing. It’s also Sigma’s first white super telephoto lens, and it looks beautiful.
So does Sigma have a hit on their hands? We’ll dive in a little further to find out.
Build and Handling
Sigma’s build standards are continually evolving, but there really isn’t any precedent for this lens. Sigma launched a new logo, new primary font, new packaging, and of course a new finish for this lens. And, in my opinion, they nailed all of those ingredients.
What’s more, I had the opportunity to visit Sigma’s Aizu, Japan factory where they create almost every part of these lenses, and I’ve got a fresh appreciation for how much the “Made in Japan” label means to this company.
This is the most feature rich lens that I’ve ever used, and there are essentially multiple sections of features. Essentially the only thing that isn’t here is an aperture ring.
We’ll work out way forwards. The closest feature to the lens barrel is the drop-in filter holder (RFH-21). The basic (included) filter is a UV/protection filter.
“Protection from what?”, you might ask, since typically protection filters are screwed onto the front of the lens to protect the front element. In this case the opposite is true, as that filter seems to protect the rear element.
You can screw any 40.5mm filter onto that filter holder.
Perhaps more useful will be the optional circular polarizer or variable ND filter. That adapter comes with an external wheel that will allow you to rotate that filter to achieve optimal effect.
The bottom line is that the front of the lens is so large that using traditional screw-on filters wouldn’t really be an option (167mm filters aren’t really a thing!) so no front threads are included.
Next we come to one bank of switches on the left side and another on the right side of the next section. On the left side we have a fairly standard bank of switches including an AF | MF switch, a three position focus limiter, an OS mode switch (OFF | Mode 1 [Standard] | Mode 2 [Panning Mode]), and finally a three position Custom switch ( OFF | C1 | C2).
L-mount purchasers will get more out of this final switch, as there is a USB UD-11 dock available for L-mount that will allow you to customize the settings. No such dock exists for Sony E-mount, so that means for Sony users (like myself) the C1 and C2 are by default more options for the OS. C1 is Dynamic View (more stabilization of the viewfinder) and C2 is “Moderate View”, which gives you less viewfinder stabilization (allowing you to follow action more naturally) but gives you more stabilization assistance at capture.
The OSS (Sigma calls this most recent version “OS2”) is very effective, being rated at 6 stops on the wide end and 5.5 stops on the telephoto end. I’m not sure how much the system will work in conjunction with your camera’s stabilization, but I certainly felt like I got more stabilization out of the combination than what I did with Sony’s own recent 400-800mm G lens. That’s great if you are trying to handhold this beast, as it isn’t exactly on the light side! I think that Sigma’s OS2 (on this and other lenses) is the most effective stabilization system that I’ve tested on E-mount to this point.
There’s a second bank of switches on the right side of the lens, and these are design to work with the unique power focus controls. There is a button that allows you to set a focus position (Preset). When this mode is activated, a quick twist of the function ring located up near the zoom ring will will instantly return focus to the preset position. This could be useful for sports (pitcher’s mound!) or if you are watching a preset position for wildlife.
In the power focus position, focus will smoothly move through the focus range. It is speed dependent (two speeds) depending on how quickly you rotate the ring. The idea is to be able to focus without moving your hand’s position (as it takes some effort to hold this thing up!)
I’m not sure that most users will be using these controls on a regular basis, but there are certain applications where they could be useful.
The “set” button in this section is not to be confused with the Custom/Focus Hold buttons) found nearer the front of the lens. There are four redundant buttons there at 90° intervals around the lens barrel so that one is always close to hand. These buttons will allow employ whatever function you’ve assigned in camera to the Focus Hold button.
Next comes the tripod collar section. Once again we have a very robust implementation. There is a tension knob that allows you to loosen the tripod collar section to rotate it. I’ll note that the balance point is excellent, making this easy to set up even on a lightweight tripod. There are strap attachment points on either side of the tripod.
The foot is awesome! It’s long, got Arca grooves, and, uniquely, it has a lovely padded section along the top that makes carrying the lens by the foot much more comfortable.
The foot also has another unique surprise. Along the back there is a dial that allows you to determine whether or not there will be clicks at the cardinal positions when you are rotating the lens on the tripod collar. I prefer clicks (easier alignment at these points), but others may prefer free rotation. This is the first lens I’ve tested that allows you to have both.
The tripod collar is not removable (not surprising in such a big lens), and removing/changing the foot will require Allan keys (included).
Next comes the manual focus ring. It looks relatively narrow in the picture below because the lens is so big, but in reality it is 3cm wide. It has a rubberized, ribbed finish and moves nicely with a good balance of freedom and resistance.
Next comes the large zoom ring. It is about 2.5x as wide as the focus ring and has a bevel in it to give it a tactile distinction from the focus ring. This is an internally zooming ring, so zooming is easier than most external zooming lenses. I would have liked the zoom ring throw to be even smaller than its roughly 80° arc to allow for even swifter zoom changes, but it isn’t bad. The action is a little heavier (and not quite as smooth) as my internally zooming Sony 200-600G, though that lens is moving much smaller elements.
It is worth noting that Sigma lenses zoom in the opposite direction of Sony lenses (and pretty much every other brand on E-mount). It’s a little annoying, actually.
There is a significant flare at the front of the lens to accommodate that huge front element.
The pearlescent finish of the “thermal insulation paint” is gorgeous. Sigma waited a long time to do a “great white”, but they did it well.
The lens hood is massive and relies on a tension knob to hold it in place.
Remove that hood and you’ll find an absolutely massive amount of glass up front.
I was able to get a look at the components of the lens before assembly, and you can see both the huge aluminum/magnesium housing components along with some of those massive glass elements that go into the design.
This includes some serious weather sealing. Sigma says, “The mount joints, manual focus ring, zoom ring, custom switches and other control switches, and exterior joints are all protected from dust and splash by a dust- and splash-resistant structure. Further, the frontmost surface of the lens is coated with a water- and oil-repellent coating to facilitate maintenance when water droplets or dust adhere to the lens.”
Bottom line is that this is a beautifully built lens both inside and out. It’s made to be tough, durable, and capable…but all of that comes at a price. This is a lens that dwarfs the largest lens in my kit, which is the Sony FE 200-600mm F5-6.3 G OSS. It looks rather tiny next the big Sigma despite covering an additional 100mm of zoom range.
It illustrates well a point that is lost on non-photographers. This lens obviously gets attention when you are out with it, as it looks like you are carrying a bazooka. People ask me, “Is that for taking pictures of the stars or something?” They assume it is akin to a telescope, because your average person has no sense of aperture, light gathering potential, or any of the actual reasons a lens like this has to be so large. They just think in terms of “reach”, as in, “the bigger the lens, the more telephoto it’s able to achieve.” It’s not even particularly easy to explain it to them, as most “civilians” have no context for trying to stop action with long telephoto lenses.
The 300-600 Sport has no more reach than my 200-600 G, but a look in the front of the lens shows just how much light gathering potential there is in this constant F4 aperture than what exists in the variable aperture Sony.
All of that glass shows just how much extra light can get to the sensor vs the Sony, which means that I have a much better chance of stopping action with the Sigma.
But yes, that means that it is huge and heavy. The lens in E-mount form is 167mm in diameter (6.6″) by a whopping 469.9mm (18.5’mm”) in length. The lens hood adds another 165mm to the length (longer than a Tamron 35-150mm!), meaning that when mounted on my camera the lens extends out a full 60cm (2 feet). Wow! You’ve got to bust out a wide angle lens just to take a picture of it!
The lens weighs in at a whopping 3970g or 140oz, meaning that for most people a nearly 4 kilo lens is going to be more of a monopod or tripod lens rather than a handheld option. I did use it mostly handheld, but it definitely gets tiring fast. Let’s just say it will be a handful for most people!
Sony has limited the use of teleconverters on all third party lenses. I can confirm that my Sony 1.4x does physically fit, but there is no flow of communication through it. The camera will power on, and you can see the image in the viewfinder or LCD, but you can’t focus. And no, you can’t just manually focus, either, because on mirrorless even manual focus relies on the focus motors to actually move the focus group.
On L-mount, however, both Sigma’s TC-1411 (1.4x) and TC-2011 (2.0x) teleconverters will work, allowing you to achieve up to 840mm at F5.6 with the 1.4x and 1200mm at F8 with the 2.0x. It is such a shame that the lens won’t work with TC’s on Sony, as that would add so much value to the lens. On L-mount the Sigma is a first party lens (L-mount is a consortium of brands) and thus gets first party support.
The aperture iris has 13 blades, which helps maintain a nice circular shape when the lens is stopped down.
It will be easy to get lots of “sparkle” from this lens if you’re shooting with bright areas in the frame.
Like many modern zooms, the minimum focus distance will vary from the wide end (2.8m) to the telephoto end (4.5m), or 110.3″ x 177.2″. Magnification is slightly higher at the telephoto end than on the wide end.
Performance is fairly close on both extremes.
If you look at the fine print, however, you’ll find that the maximum magnification figure of 1:6 (right under 0.17x) actually comes at a very specific 470mm. There’s one significant problem with that – there is no marking at 470mm, leaving you having to guess where exactly that is. I took a shot and got 462mm, but you can see that it definitely produced a higher level of magnification.
The minimum focus distance didn’t feel much longer (if any) than the 2.8m of 300mm at 470mm(ish).
Obviously you can obliterate a background when shooting at close focus distances. Depth of field is less than one centimeter.
The lens ships with a nylon hood, a very large (and very nice) padded and zippered case, a shoulder strap, and the basic drop-in filter holder.
There’s a lot to love here in every sense of the word. The Sigma 300-600mm F4 DG OS | SPORT is one of those rare lenses that is simultaneously both very expensive (at $6000 USD) and also a great bargain relative to the competition.
Autofocus and Video
This is another area where Sigma has made some key strides. Their initial offerings on Sony (and L-mount) featured STM focus motors, but Sigma has since released their more powerful, smoother HLA focus motor (High speed Linear Actuator). The HLA motor has much more torque/thrust than lenses equipped with the stepping motor, which is very important when you are talking about a lens with larger, heavier optical glass like this one. The increased thrust of the focus motor means that it is capable of moving much faster and is thus much more reactive. Real world focus changes at 300mm are essentially instantaneous, while focus pulls at 600mm from a close to distance subject took just a bit longer. Focus speed was fast enough that I could pick up birds from essentially the first shot.
This will allow you to nail the critical moments and get the shots you want.
Focus sound is basically nonexistent. The HLA motor is essentially silent even if I put my ear next to the lens. It is quiet enough that I literally looked up at the screen to make sure the lens was actually focusing.
Focus accuracy during bursts was largely extremely good (though perhaps not Sony GM good). I did have one particularly distracting burst with a lot of very bright highlights on the water that results in some focus confusion and misses, but that’s understandable when the subject stops being the highest contrast object in frame.
In general I found that where a high quality Sony lens might give very near 100% perfectly focused shots, the 300-600 Sport would give around 90%, with a few shots here and there that were close…but very slightly front or back focused.
Slower moving subjects weren’t a problem…particularly when they aren’t moving at all!
I shot a kayaker shooting the spring rapids and had no problem tracking the subject throughout the sequence.
The HLA focus system is definitely fast enough to do birding, with quick acquisitions and accurate tracking.
Bottom line is that this autofocus system is capable of unleashing the optics of the lens.
Autofocus for Stills
I also saw mostly good results for video work. Autofocus pulls were very fast and confident. No hunting or settling. Focus pulls at 30mm were smooth and confident. At 600mm pulls were a little slower as momentum built and then moved quickly.
I shot sequences of the seabirds and found that focus was nicely “sticky” on the subjects but was sometimes a bit reluctant to move to the next subject if one bird walked out of frame, for example.
Here’s a freeze frame from one of my video clips.
Overall I found video focus worked fine. I had a limited time with the lens and didn’t have as much time to give to the video side of things.
Sigma’s HLA focus motors are great, though they are slightly limited on Sony by the fact that Sony limits bursts to 15FPS with third party lenses. It’s not “fair”, but it’s reality. This lens is awesome, but it would be even more awesome with TC support and full burst speeds.
Image Quality Breakdown
As you would expect, this is a fairly complex lens optically. There are 28 elements in 21 groups, and, as you can see from the optical design cutout below, a lot of space between some of those groups. There are 6 FLD elements and 1 SLD element as a part of the design. The MTF chart shows an excellent center and a very linear fade to the corners, which remain excellent. The 600mm looks similar but just slightly weaker (and lower contrast).
At it’s best, the 300-600 Sport is able to produce images with a lot of detail, contrast, and pop even at 600mm, F4.
If you aren’t experienced with long telephoto lenses its important to know that sharpness results are much more dependent on environmental conditions than with shorter focal lengths. You are often shooting at much great distances, and there are many more variables like thermal pockets that cause heat shimmers and other optical disturbances. Shooting with long lenses requires skill and developing a sense of what works and what doesn’t…often some trial and error.
I got fairly lucky on the day I shot the visual comparison of focal length, as the water temperature and the air temperature were fairly close, which eliminated some of the heat waves which can mar sharpness.
Here’s 300mm:
And here’s 600mm:
Obviously that is going to be extremely useful…particularly with an F4 aperture.
A bit of a caveat before my formal tests. It is very hard to chart test long lenses unless you have very specific equipment and environments (which I don’t have). I worked very hard to make my tests as scientific and accurate as possible, but when I have to take things outside there are more environmental factors that can cause minor inconsistencies. I used a ten second delay on all tests, for example, but a lens this big is like a sail, and so there’s a possibility that vibrations can be introduced even if nothing is touching the tripod. That being said, my results look fairly consistent with what I expect.
Testing for longitudinal chromatic aberrations (LoCA) show a bit of fringing at 300mm:
…but essentially none at 600mm:
I also saw zero issues with LaCA (lateral chromatic aberrations), which shows up along the edges of the frame. All of the transitions here are very neutral.
This is a lens with near perfect OPTICAL correction of vignette and distortion. These “before and after” results are not going to look very different as there was very little to correct.
I used a -2 to correct a tiny bit of pincushion distortion and added about a +12 of vignette correction mostly because it felt weird to not add any.
At 600mm things are largely the same. I changed to a -3 of correction for the distortion and if anything there was less vignette.
There’s nothing here that would need correcting in real world shots, though correction profiles obviously do exist.
This is a high end optical instrument, and they’ve corrected the issues in the optics rather than through software. What a novel idea!
So how about resolution and contrast? My formal tests are done on the 61MP Sony a7RV.
The MTF suggests that this is a very sharp lens in the center and mid-frame areas, with a typical corner drop-off at wide apertures. Is that what we see? Here’s a look at the test chart from which the crops come.
Here are crops from across the frame at F4 and shown at a 200% magnification.
In many ways I’m more impressed by the mid-frame and corners than the center, which looks very good but the corners more unusually so.
What’s so weird to me is that you can get shots like this on the WIDE end of a zoom lens!
That tiny, shallow depth of field of 300mm, F4, is actually incredibly rare. None of the variable aperture zooms achieve F4 at 300mm, much less 600mm!
Stopping down will provide a slight contrast boost.
Sharpness consistency seems to peak at F8 in some areas of the frame, though you’ll probably get the best center performance at F5.6.
Diffraction will start to take a bite out of contrast by F11, but more noticeably by the minimum aperture of F22.
Moving on to 400mm shows an uptick in contrast and detail as compared to 300mm.
That’s particularly noticeable in the corners, which are notably sharper and higher contrast.
That’s an absolutely brilliant performance for F4 at 400mm.
Ferrari’s head will give us a real world sense of F4 performance in this range.
Contrast will tick up even higher at F5.6. It’s fantastically sharp in the 400mm range.
If we move on to 500mm, contrast is a bit lower, but sharpens up nicely at F5.6:
Even at F4, however, there’s a nice amount of detail in real world shots.
At 600mm we see a similar pattern, with good sharpness and contrast that improves when stopped down to F5.6:
Corners also improve a bit by F5.6:
I find that F8 performed the best at 600mm in my tests, though the gains from F4 to F5.6 to F8 are very incremental.
Even “on the wing” the 300-600 Sport is capable of giving crisp results.
On a random side note: have you every considered how weird seagulls “red eyeliner” is?
It wasn’t hard to nail great looking shots in the fast, reactive situations where this lens will the most valuable.
One of the things you have to get used to when using an extreme instrument like this is just how shallow the depth of field is at 600mm, F4. Even at a considerable distance of 15 meters (around 50 feet), the the depth of field is still just 15cm (6 inches). In this shot, for example, shot at roughly that distance, the foreground seagull is in focus while the landing (and squawking) seagull just a couple of feet away is completely out of focus.
A shot of this chain at a closer distance shows just how tiny the depth of field is.
The big advantage of a lens like this is no much the close focus shots where you can completely obliterate a background (though that looks great!)
Lessor lenses can do something similar if you get very close to the subject.
But the advantage of a lens like this is going to be in the quality of the background blur when you have the unfavorable ratios where your subject is further away from the camera and perhaps the background is closer to the subject. With variable aperture zooms at F6.3 or F8 there won’t be much subject separation, but that’s no problem with this lens.
In this shot of Nala I was around 10 meters (33 feet) away from her, but she was only perhaps 2 meters from the background objects, yet the 300-600 Sport allows for nice separation.
Even a dove in a complicated network of budding branches is still rendered pretty nicely.
I didn’t shoot right into the sun with the lens, but I did plenty of shooting in very bright and backlit scenes without any sign of flare issues. That’s a more typical case use anyway.
Overall, the optics are pretty fantastic. No, it might not quite match a dedicated prime at any of those main focal lengths, but it’s about as close as you are likely to get in a zoom. And, if you consider that you are getting a 300mm, 400mm, 500mm, and 600mm F4 near-prime performance for just $6000, that’s pretty amazing. That collection of lenses mentioned above would probably cost nearer $40,000! If you want to see more images, check out the image gallery for the lens here.
Conclusion
The Sigma 300-600mm F4 DG OS | SPORT is a very appropriate flagship lens. It’s big, it’s expensive, it’s high performing, and it’s beautiful. Carrying this thing around is liking having a supermodel on your arm…you get a LOT of attention.
It also is a very capable lens, delivering high optical performance along with generally excellent autofocus performance (though not quite at a premium Sony level). Like most long telephoto lenses, however, the more you use it the more refined your technique with the lens would become and thus the quality of your photos will only improve.
You’re going to need to have (or build) some serious muscle if you’re going to use this lens handheld for any length of time, but most people can solve that with a monopod. I love this addition to either Sony E or Leica L, however, as it provides a more flexible yet still high performing alternative to long telephoto primes. I’ve always noted that there was a huge gap between the $2000 telephoto zooms and then the $10,000 telephoto primes, and Sigma has done a beautiful job of filling that void with this lens. I just wish that Sony would release the artificial limitations on third parties, and the 300-600 Sport was MADE for teleconverters and fast burst speeds. Or perhaps the solution is a Sony Alpha 1 level camera for L-mount. Right now neither solution seems close, but fortunately even with the limitations the Sigma 300-600mm F4 DG OS | SPORT is a pretty killer lens.
Pros:
The kind of lens many birders have been looking for
Beautifully made
Oozes premium quality
Feature rich
Thorough weather sealing
Function ring brings an interesting control point
HLA focus motor is extremely quiet and has a lot of thrust
Extremely sharp lens over most of the frame and zoom range
Excellent flare resistance
Near perfect control of aberrations
Beautiful colors
Constant F4 aperture
Great value for what it offers
Cons:
Very big and very heavy
Focus accuracy during bursts not quite at Sony level
Keywords: Sigma 300-600mm, DG, SPORT, SPORTS, Sigma 300-600 Sport, Sigma 300-600mm F4, Sigma 300-600mm F4 DG OS Sport, Sigma 300-600 Review, #SIGMAEmount, #SIGMA #SIGMA300600mmF4Sport, #SIGMASport, #SIGMASPORTS, Full Frame, Review, Sony Alpha 1, Sony a7RV, Review, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Bokeh, Flare Resistance, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Photography, let the light in, weathersealing, #letthelightin, DA
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
In the past six weeks I have reviewed two amazing 135mm lenses – both in Nikon Z mount. That’s great, as 18 months ago we had zero 135mm lenses. Both of them have tremendous strengths and a lot of similarities…but they are priced radically different, with the LAB coming in at $900 USD and the Plena closer to $2500 USD. Is the Plena worth it? Does the LAB make the Plena irrelevant? It’s complicated…so let’s dive in. You can get my full thoughts in the video review below or by checking out a summary of my findings in the article below.
Thanks to Chris at Nikon Canada for sending me a review loaner of the Plena and to Chloe from Viltrox for supplying me a review copy of the LAB. As always, this is a completely independent review. All opinions and conclusions are my own.*The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done with the 45MP Nikon Z8, which I reviewed here.
Mostly similar feature set (Aperture/Control ring, AF | MF, Function)
Both weather sealed
Autofocus speed and feel pretty similar*
Optically very similar (portrait comparisons)
Neutral Differences
One is wider (Plena); one is longer (LAB) – within 1% of volume
Reasons to Choose LAB:
Price (currently $899 (less with discount), so -$1600
More customizable – LCD screen allows you to set A – B focus
Has focus limiter and click/declick aperture
Slightly less distortion
Nicer build? (definitely nicer hood)
Sharper in mid-frame and corners
Higher magnification
Reasons to Choose PLENA:
Much lighter at 995 weights 273g less than LAB (1268g)
Can do smooth aperture racks
Manually focuses smoother
Rounder specular highlights
About half the vignette
More focus consistency
More reactive focus
A few less video focus quirks*
Sharper center
Conclusion
I think it is safe to say that differences in performance between the two lenses are subtle. They are both incredible optically, but I did encounter more quirks with the Viltrox (needs a firmware update – 16mm). There were moments using them side by side where I was reminded that one was a first party lens and the other a third party lens. I would still call the Plena the better lens, all things considered. BUT – $1600 is a lot of money, and I think the case can be easily made that the LAB is giving you at least 90-95% of the performance on the Plena – and you could buy 2.7 LABs for the price of one Plena.
Keywords: Nikkor, Nikkor Z 135mm, Plena, F1.8, F1.8 S, Nikkor Z, Nikkor Z 135mm F1.8 S Plena review, Nikon 135mm, Nikon Z 135mm, Viltrox, LAB, Viltrox AF 135mm F1.8 LAB Z, Nikon, Nikon Z8, Z, Z-mount, Z8, Review, mirrorless, Full Frame, Sports, Tracking, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Handling, Focus, Portraits, Resolution, High ISO, Image Quality, Sample Images, Photography, 45MP, #letthelightin, #DA, #NIKON, #Z8, #nikonz8
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Last year about this time I reviewed the little 7Artisans AF 27mm F2.8, a pretty decent budget autofocus lens for various APS-C mounts (I reviewed in on Sony). This year they are back with another APS-C lens, but this is a much more ambitious option – the 7Artisans AF 35mm F1.4. F1.4 is two full stops brighter than an F2.8 lens, and is thus much harder to engineer. They have also elected to bring it to market (at least initially) just for Fuji X-mount. 7Artisans has managed to keep the size small and the price inexpensive ($169 USD), so should you consider this new 7Artisans AF 35mm for your Fuji camera? Find out my thoughts in the video review below or by reading on…
Thanks to 7Artisans for sending me a review copy of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. All opinions and conclusions are my own.I’m doing this review on a 40MP Fujifilm X-H2 camera.You can visit the product page for the 7Artisans AF 35mm F1.4 here.
The first thing that jumped out to me about the new AF 35mm F1.4 is just how small it is. This is lens not much bigger than a pancake lens (only 49mm long) and which weighs only 184g. That’s incredibly small and light for an F1.4 lens.
35mm on APS-C behaves differently than on full frame. While a 35mm lens on full frame is moderately wide, the 1.5x crop factor of Fuji’s X-mount system means that the lens will behave like a 52.5mm full frame lens, or what is called the “normal” perspective because it is similar to the field of view that the human eye sees.
There are some quirks with this lens that I’ll detail, but put in the right situation, the 7Artisans AF 35mm F1.4 can produce some lovely images, with very soft, creamy bokeh and a solid amount of sharpness and contrast even at F1.4:
So is this a lens that you should seriously consider? We’ll explore whether or not that is the case in this review.
Build and Handling
As noted, this lens has a nicely compact size. If you remove the lens hood, the lens looks pretty short mounted on my X-H2. Not much sticks out past that grip!
It is 68mm (2.67″) in diameter and is just 49mm (1.92″) in length. 184g translates to just under 6.5oz, making for a very compact, lightweight package.
The front filter thread size is fairly uncommon 62mm.
The 7Artisans AF 35mm F1.4 is wider in diameter (+4mm) but shorter (-5.3mm) in length than the Viltrox AF 35mm F1.7, a lens that has a similar price and may be the top competition for this lens.
The Viltrox is very slightly lighter (-14g) at 170g in weight. Both lenses are have metal mounts, but while the Viltrox has a plastic outer shell (though very good plastics), the 7Artisans is a mix of metals and plastics.
Because there aren’t any real features on the lens, the look of the lens is very clean and simple. Nothing striking, but nothing negative, either. The large tulip shaped hood that is included adds a bit of visual interest.
That hood is strongly needed, as we’ll see in a bit.
The one feature here is a USB-C port covered by a small rubber gasket. Be careful when pulling it out, as it is small and wouldn’t be hard to lose.
The USB-C port will allow for quick and easy firmware updates, which is very smart of 7Artisans considering that they are A) new to autofocus and B) a third party lens maker, so they may have to rely on firmware updates to maintain compatibility with cameras in the future. The lens does include a USB-C cable in the box in case you don’t have one.
There is a metal lens mount but no weather sealing gasket, though no competing lenses at this price offer weather sealing, either. 7Artisans does claim a water and fingerprint resistant coating on the front element.
Some Fuji users are going to be disappointed to find that there is no aperture ring, as that is a fairly ubiquitous feature on native Fuji lenses. There are seven aperture blades in the aperture iris. These blades are clearly not rounded, as you can clearly see the aperture shape even by F2. The geometry near the edges of the frame gets a little weird looking as you stop down further (F1.4, F2, and F2.8 shown below).
The manual focus ring is main object on the lens barrel. It’s made of tightly ribbed plastics, and has a fairly firm amount of damping. While perhaps a little heavy, the damping feels good (tight and connected), but unfortunately (as is so often the case on Fuji) the focus seems to happen in little steps rather than in a smooth, linear fashion.
The minimum focus distance is 35cm. I estimate the maximum magnification figure to be roughly 0.12x, which looks like this:
That’s close enough to be useful but not exceptionally so. The Viltrox, for example, can focus a little closer (33cm) and has a slightly higher 0.13x magnification.
The 7Artisans AF 35mm F1.4 is a simple lens, but it does get high marks for being so compact and light for an F1.4 lens. It’s also a very affordable lens at just $169 USD. You aren’t going to get too many F1.4 lenses for that price.
Autofocus for Stills
Most 7Artisans lenses that I have tested have used an STM (stepping motor) focus system, but I could quickly tell that this wasn’t the case with the AF 35mm F1.4. It has the kind of buzzy focus motor that I haven’t heard in a while, and autofocus definitely proved to be the weak link in the equation. Autofocus speed is not quick. In my formal tests there was a bit of a lag while inertia built, and then the main focus pull was relatively quick. The combined focus speed was on the slower side, however.
That’s not a big deal if your subject is still.
Autofocus precision was generally pretty good when shooting at large apertures. My shots at F1.4 (like above) were generally well focused – even if the subject was in profile and the eye was not generally visible.
Shots at F1.4 to F2 of other subjects were accurately focused as well.
So, with still subjects, focus is fine.
If the subject is moving, however, it’s another story. Focus speed is just not reactive enough to adjust to movement. This is NOT an action lens.
There’s a secondary problem, too, though this one will most likely be fixed via firmware. On my X-H2, I could focus well and accurately if I was shooting at larger apertures. This shot at F2.8, for example, locked on quickly and without any pulsing.
But just a couple of minutes later, I tried to take a shot up the street at F5.6. Focus just went back and forth without locking on a target. I went ahead and pressed the shutter to highlight the issue.
Here’s another example. On the left side you can see that I clicked the shutter and happened to catch the pulse where it was totally defocused. On the right side I had to open the aperture up to F3.2 to achieve proper focus.
I do think that 7Artisans will fix this via firmware, as I’ve seen them do similar things before. But, at the moment of this review, it remains an issue on my X-H2. I watched a few other reviews from those using different Fuji cameras and none of those reviewers reported similar issues. I tested a second copy to make sure it wasn’t just my original lens, and I saw the same issue on both, so it is definitely an X-H2 compatibility issue.
Autofocus is definitely the weak link in this design.
Video AF
I saw some mixed results on the video front. Fuji’s state of autofocus for video definitely has some shortcomings at present, and that is a bad combination with a lens that is also a little weak in the autofocus department.
Video focus pulls were reasonably well damped, though as is often the case I found that touch to focus often wouldn’t work, with either the lens stubbornly refusing to shift focus or a serious lag before it happened. I see this often on Fuji, so I put more of the blame there than on the lens. I did see some visible steps in the focus process, however, and sometimes there would be a final adjustment once focus was 95% of the way there. Focusing breathing isn’t terrible, but I did note that it was more pronounced than the Viltrox.
The 7Artisans AF 35mm F1.4 did better with with my “hand test” however, where I alternately block the view to my face with my hand and then remove it. While there might be a bit of that lag for a split second, focus would then transitioned nicely from my hand to my face. Fuji’s AF does better when there is a recognizable subject that the AF can track.
Focus results are decent if you are just shooting a normal video clip and focus is making small, minor adjustments.
7Artisans AF 35mm F1.4 Image Quality Breakdown
The 7Artisans AF 35mmmm F1.4 has a simple optical design of 8 elements in 5 groups. There is one ED (extra low dispersion) element in the design. I wasn’t able to to find a published MTF chart for the lens.
I always add the caveat that the Fujifilm 40MP X-Trans sensor in my X-H2 and other cameras is the most demanding platform that I test on…by far. It is the equivalent of over 90MP on full frame, so if a lens can perform reasonably well there…it is exceptionally sharp. The 7Artisans AF 35mm F1.4 doesn’t thrive in every optical situation, but, at its best, it is very usably sharp even at F1.4.
7Artisans glass often has a unique look to it. Somewhat cinematic, without deep contrast levels. For the right subject it really works, though I think it is a “taste” thing (you’ll either like the look or you won’t). The Viltrox delivers a higher contrast, higher detail look wide open while the 7Artisans has a more cinematic rendering.
Zooming in to a pixel level shows the more intense contrast and detail that comes from the Viltrox lens.
Like, I said, it’s a look. Some people don’t want intense contrast and detail, preferring something that’s a little “kinder” on skin.
There are some minor issues with longitudinal chromatic aberrations (LoCA) which show up before and after the plane of focus. I didn’t notice them in a lot of situations, but as I’ve found with some other 7Artisans lenses, that result is very situational. There’s a mild amount in the contrast points here:
A lot of the optical vulnerabilities for the 7Artisans AF 35mm F1.4 come in bright or high contrast situations. Here, for example, you see that contrast drops and some fringing emerges around the subject because of the brightness of the snow.
Put the lens in a lower contrast situation, like this, and I think the end result is pretty great even at F1.4; I don’t see any fringing even in the vulnerable spots.
In general, I don’t have a lot of concerns over LoCA.
LaCA lateral chromatic aberrations are another story. There is some strong fringing visible in the transitions from black to white at the edges of the frame.
There is moderate amounts of barrel distortion and vignette present.
I corrected the barrel distortion with a +7 (nothing extreme) and about two stops of vignette (+57). That’s actually not bad at all for an F1.4 lens wide open.
So how about resolution and contrast? My tests have been done on a 40MP X-H2. I have used a steady tripod and two second delay to achieve optimal results. Crops will be shown at roughly a 200% level of magnification. Here’s the test chart:
Here are F1.4 crops at roughly 200% from across the frame (center, mid-frame, and lower right corner).
The center results look reasonably sharp but with lower contrast, the mid-frame has similar lower contrast but dropping sharpness towards the further out edge, while the corners look quite soft. My testing criteria (particularly on this Fuji sensor) tends to exaggerate softness more than what you’ll see with real world images. If you want high contrast, you probably want to choose the Viltrox, which is noticeably sharper and higher contrast across the frame even when the 7Artisans is stopped down to F1.8.
The rendering of the 7Artisans AF 35mm F1.4 is more like a classic lens. A little “dreamy” wide open (a glow due to lower contrast), which works nicely in certain situations. In lower contrast situations the results are less dreamy. This show in a restaurant, for example, looks great even at F1.4. I don’t need (or want) sharp corners here.
This street scene at F2.2 has a great look to it.
If you tend to favor the “Instagram look” and put those kinds of filters on your images, then this would be a good fit.
Like many classic lenses, if you want more sharpness and contrast, stop down to F2.8 or smaller, as contrast and detail intensify there. There’s a dramatic difference between F2 and F2.8 in the center:
The corners don’t sharp up until F5.6, though they never get quite as sharp as the center.
Peak consistency across the frame is found at F8. Landscape images look good…but again, if you just want sharpness, there are better options.
Diffraction will start to soften the image after that, with a mild amount at F11 but a more obvious amount by F16,though this is one of the rare lenses where the sharpness gains the lens continues to make as you stop it down offset the softening due to diffraction. I would definitely use it at F11, and would consider using it even at F16.
The subject of bokeh, like sharpness, is a little complicated, as there are situations where I really like the rendering from the lens and others where I don’t.
Here, for example, I think the bokeh is lovely. Very soft and creamy, resulting in a beautiful image.
At F1.4, the geometry of specular highlights is only okay, however. There’s some of the normal “cat eye” effect near the edges of the frame, but what I don’t like is the irregular “clipping” that changes the shape a bit near the edges of the frame.
And, where normally specular highlights will become more evenly round when the aperture is stopped down a bit, the 7Artisans 35mm F1.4 does the opposite. The shape of the specular highlights becomes even more irregular.
Now, to be fair, bokeh is a subjective measure that really comes down to your personal tastes, but I’m not personally a fan of irregular shapes in the bokeh.
I also found that the lens really benefits from being smart about the background. It doesn’t handle complexity well. This shot, for example, has a clean background that is rendered beautifully.
This shot has a more complex background, and I find that a lot of edges in the defocused region are too hard and draw the eye in a negative way.
This shot is pretty good, however, rendering the background in a fairly soft fashion.
Bottom line is that you’ll need to learn to use this lens to its strengths. If you do so, it can deliver some beautiful images.
7Artisans can use some improvement to their lens coatings, which is part of the reason for the more the vintage character of the lens. That remains true when it comes to flare. This is a lens you’ll definitely want to use the lens hood on, as it is particularly prone to ghosting when the bright source of light is angled in the corners.
The lens is better with veiling, as contrast holds up reasonably well when a bright light is in the frame.
A bright wide angle prime like this will be useful in low light situations, including shooting the night sky. When testing for coma I found a few things. 1) Bright light points will have some fringing on them (crop 1) and 2) while coma isn’t too bad, the low sharpness in the corners will mean that star points aren’t very crisp (crop 2).
When viewed as a full image, however, it looks fine. I managed to catch a meteor shower that I didn’t even know was happening!
The look of your images will vary a fair bit depending on your shooting conditions. That may have something to do with the low element count and lack of coatings on the lens. I found that it behaved more like a vintage lens, and often I rather liked it. I felt like it had character and wasn’t the typical modern, perfectly corrected lens. If that look appeals to you, then you might enjoy this lens.
So not a flawless performance, but for a very inexpensive lens there’s a lot of positives here. If you’d like to see more image samples, check out the image gallery here.
Conclusion
The idea that we could get an autofocusing F1.4 lens for well under $200 was unthinkable just a few years ago. Those lenses would more typically be in the $400-500 range, and I’m still pretty amazed at how decent these extremely inexpensive lenses are. $169 USD is a great price for this lens, particularly when you consider that Fuji’s own 35mm F1.4 costs more than $400 more, and even their 35mm F2 costs more than twice as much. Now, to be fair, those lenses are better, with better features, build, and image quality, but as noted in this review, someone on a tight budget can buy the 7Artisans 35mm and will be able to create images you simply couldn’t make with a kit lens.
The autofocus isn’t fantastic (and needs a firmware update!), but it mostly got the job done. And while the optical performance isn’t exceptional by modern standards, it does have a good deal of charm that will appeal to those who feel that modern lenses are overcorrected and overly complex.
There’s no bells and whistles here, but this is actually a really good little lens for the money. If you want a lens with a more modern rendering, then choose the Viltrox AF 35mm F1.7 for similar money, but if you are looking for some vintage charm, check out the 7Artisans AF 35mm F1.4. If your dream lens is a classic vintage lens but with autofocus, then the 7Artisans 35mm may be just what you’ve been looking for.
Pros:
Extremely compact and lightweight
Comes with a lens hood
Has an F1.4 aperture
USB-C port for firmware updates
Good focus accuracy at large apertures
Useful center sharpness wide open
Good sharpness across most of the frame when stopped down
Fairly good bokeh
Vignette and distortion not bad
Interesting look to images
Is this the least expensive F1.4 lens you can buy?
Keywords: 7Artisans, 7Artisans 35mm, AF, 35mm, F1.4, 7Artisans AF 35mm F1.4, Full APS-C, 7Artisans 35mm, Fuji X, Fujifilm, X-mount, APS-C, Review, Telephoto, Action, Tracking, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Bokeh, Flare Resistance, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Photography, Fujifilm X-T5, Fujifilm X-H2, let the light in, #letthelightin, DA
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8 S Gallery 
Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8 S Review 
LAB vs GM – Sony 35mm Showdown 
Sigma 300-600mm F4 SPORT Gallery 
Sony 50-150mm F2 GM vs Tamron 35-150mm F2-2.8 
