20 Best Lenses For Red Komodo (2023 Updated)

For some background, I generally do not mind lens price tags like this (I paid $1,500) if the performance is outstanding and the rendering is beautiful. For the latter, the rendering is the reason to buy this lens.

The look of a moderately wide angle combined with the 1. 2 aperture is really a unique look. Fortunately, the lens is sharp at the point of focus whether at close distance or far and whether you are focusing at the center of the frame or mid-frame.

If you focus toward the edges it can help to stop down a bit. The bokeh is really appealing: not too busy unlike other fast 35s and I personally really like the vignette it produces. As for negatives, there are a few.

I don’t mind the size given it’s a 1. 2 with autofocus, but I expected more symmetric distortion and field curvature. The distortion is a bit funny in that the correction affects one side of the image more than the other.

It’s not a simple barrel in the middle and that can make compositions on flat surfaces more challenging. The big issue I have found is the field curvature and in summary, the lens’ performance isn’t a harmonic improvement when stopping down.

Instead I find it is best at either 1. 2 or smaller than f/4. For some reason the field seems relatively flat at 1. 2, but from 1. 4 to f/4 (or so) and in I can’t get sharpness on a flat plane if I focus at the center at infinity.

Using an off-center mid-field focus point is better as is focusing at a close distance where the curvature seems to affect the plane of sharpness less. The final issue is autofocus in that in single AF it can lock focus then refocus again on its own.

I’m not sure how that happens but also haven’t seen a firmware update.

Image quality is excellent and this is a very capable lens. Eye-AF works extremely well and nails focus every time and the lens is sharp even down to f1. 2. The color and contrast are great and the bokeh is smooth.

The build also feels solid and I love aperture rings. It isn’t perfect though. Unless you really know you will use f1. 2 a lot, I wouldn’t recommend something this big. Its almost as heavy as my old Nikon 80-200 2.

8 and is heaver than a 24-70 2. 8. Given how good Sony’s 35 1. 8 and the Voightlander 40 are, you really ought to consider if that heft is worth differences that generally will only be seen in pixel peeping at more normal apertures (if then).

If you want f 1. 2 then go for it but otherwise think twice. In addition to the most obvious con, which is the giant size, the biggest issue this lens has is flare that makes it a worse landscape lens than my Voightlanders.

The autofocus sometimes will also pulse in and out in a way that my other lenses don’t do and struggle to lock onto focus in landscapes with fading light.

I just finished using this lens for a week on a short film video shoot. I really loved the quality of the shots, and despite the weight, I was still able to balance and use it in a Robin-S. My only issue is the focus-by-wire they put into this lens instead of mechanical focus.

That made it almost impossible to manual focus a moving subject since the speed at which you move the focus ring will change how fast the focus changes. Because of this you cannot do consistent focus pulls.

That said, it did work great with touchscreen focus pulls, but when I needed to focus on someone walking away, manually focusing was very difficult (although I did have pretty good success with people walking towards the camera with letting the autofocus face detection do the work for me.

I also used the Sigma ART 50mm f/1. 4 and it was WAY easier to manually focus and set up focus pulls ahead of time because of the mechanical focus system. Just something to keep in mind for video shooters if you are looking at this lens over the 35mm f/1.

4 that does have mechanics focus.

My first impression of this lens in a store was that it was too small and didn’t feel like a serious lens. I still put it on my a6600 and took a few shots and then compared it to the Sony 16-55 which felt more substantial with a price to match.

When I looked at the raw files at home I noticed that there wasn’t really a resolution difference and the Sony files had heavy distortion and vignetting before a profile was applied. I decided to get the Sigma knowing I could resell it if needed.

Well, I tested it against my old Sigma 17-50mm f2. 8 (EOS) which was my main zoom and then also the excellent Sony 55mm 1. 8 and Sony Zeiss 24mm 1. 8. Moving away from the retrofocal design for DSLRs meant there was no optical compromise- on the wide end the Sigma is far more detailed with sharper corners and less haze and aberration than the older Sigma had despite a huge decrease in size and weight.

Even stopped down the new lens is a winner. At longer focal lengths they are similar. Much less coma for point light sources at night as well even wide open. The Sigma wasn’t quite the equal to the primes wide open but very close stopped down which is more than acceptable for an all-purpose lens given the price and size.

Are there downsides? Yes. I find it initially misfocuses some of the time which is a problem if you aren’t paying attention (shooting from the hip, etc. ). Give it a second to acquire focus and it will be fine.

None of my other lenses exhibit this oddity. Tracking autofocus with the a6600 works very well as does burst autofocus and video autofocus. Also, the filter size is small so you’ll save money on polarizers or ND filters.

Sigma really nailed this lens design and didn’t have to sacrifice optical quality like Sony did with the horrible 16-50 kit lens.

Is this lens optically perfect? Absolutely not. The 24-70mm f2. 8 DG DN Art is pretty much better at all focal lengths except at the wide end. However, this lens is really light for a mid-range zoom, and excels in some areas where the Art version does not.

For photography and at normal distances, this lens is perfectly sharp from about 28mm all the way to 50mm. Image Quality is great all around the board, but I would try to avoid 70mm unless the subject is about 20 ft away from you.

70mm is usable and acceptable if you don’t plan on cropping or blowing up the image for large prints. The one downside of this lens is that up-close IQ is actually quite terrible, regardless of focal length.

You can stop down the aperture up close for improved results, but you won’t see any improved performance at 70mm until f7. 1. As for video – well this is where the lens really shines. No focus breathing at any focal length, the zoom turn is nice and smooth, and the focus ring is really quite damp and precise.

Focal length doesn’t matter as much when shooting video with this lens, since you’re not pixel peeping when it comes to video. I love this lens for being so light and compact for full-frame bodies, and the compromises made for photography are fully acceptable.

I might not use this lens for professional photography work, but for casual shoots or as a back-up zoom this lens is great. I would definitely recommend this lens for video shooters though, unless you must have the 24mm focal length.

This is basically the APS-C equivalent of the 24-70mm 2. 8, virtually a legendary workhorse for any photographer. I shoot stills and video on an a6500. My most basic requirements for my kit for decades (going back to when I only shot film) has been a zoom with a wide range and also a fast normal lens.

Maybe add a dedicated portrait lens and an ultra wide. I have the Sony 18-135mm, and Sigma’s trio which is just such a well planned set of primes (except for the varying filter threads!!), plus a Samyang 12mm.

I rented Tamron’s 17-70mm and it’s fantastic, but for my work, it was just bigger and heavier than what I wanted. This Sigma fits the bill perfect for splitting the difference between my fast primes and my convenient super zoom.

I loose some speed and some reach, but gain loads of convenience while retaining the amazingly small size. This zoom may be redundant in a few ways, but still the best of both worlds when I want/need it.

Full frame guys (I shoot that too) may complain about slightly deeper depth of field and minor lowlight differences of the sensor, but this lens with a fitting camera is very close to a frame professional 24-70mm set-up at a fraction of the size.

As for the extra 20mm you gain from the Tamron, I’m okay with a small crop if I need it and I can live with the 1mm less on the wide end. I would have loved the stabilization, but at least I have IBIS, even if not quite as good.

I hope this review helps a few people looking at the same decisions as me as I was sizing up the 17-70, Sigma’s trio, and this lens (the Sony 16-55 is just too rich for my blood).

I bought this lens because I appreciate the 28mm focal length and enjoy using primes. Sigma has a look to it that I really like, and this lens doesn’t disappoint. Using the 28mm on my Sony A7RIV was not as easy as I expected as a casual shooter.

This is due to the (somewhat) poor AF and missing lens profile in Capture One Pro. I must spend more time processing the raw images to make them look nice and am seeing many more shots with missed focus than I am used to.

This was resolved somewhat by using software with the appropriate lens profile, and once I found an option, I was able to see what this lens is supposed to look like; it really does deserve the Art badge.

It’s not the sharpest lens in the world, but it produces incredible light-stars at f/5. 6 and up, and it does a fantastic job controlling colors, glare, and just presents a very pleasant image. I’ve had some incredible results using a tripod and spending a minute or two setting up the scene.

Open the lens up to f/2+ and you’ll have an easier time achieving focus and avoiding haziness. I’m a mid-level hobbyist and I find this lens challenging to use but very gratifying when I get the shot right.

This lens does an excellent job creating a well-balanced image that can be easily processed to achieve various looks; all with exceptional detail and quality.

This was my first lens rental experience and it was a pleasant surprise. All of the steps were clearly defined and explained. When I spoke with a representative I received clear information. In addition, the representative suggested that I speak with one of the technical advisors who was very helpful regarding specific tips for the lens I rented.

As for the lens. OMG. WOW! I had heard that it was fantastic from many photographers on YouTube. But, seeing the results was just another level. I rented the lens because after shooting my daughter’s HS grad photos last year, her friend asked me to do hers.

I was really nervous because I didn’t really have a fast lens. So, I decided to take a chance and rent the Fuji 56mm f1. 2. Again, WOW! Thank-you so much for all of your help and for a great rental experience.

Photography is a hobby for me so I’m no professional. My cousin’s fiance asked me to capture the moment he proposed so I knew I had to use top notch glass for such a special moment. I’m glad I did because the images were amazing! I shot raw and jpeg and the jpeg images were amazing.

I didn’t even bother touching up the raw files. My cousin and her fiance received plenty of comments of how amazing and professional the photos looked. I’m very happy with the rental and would recommend this glass to anyone looking for great photos.

The 56mm f/ 1. 2 R lens I purchased claimed it was in “great condition”. Obviously, “great condition” is objective. The lens sounds like a maraca when changing the f-stop, and has a hard time focusing.

If I had known of the real condition of this lens, I wouldn’t have bought it. I don’t mind the “cosmetic” wear out, as long as it works properly, but this lens is frustrating to work with. I tried it a couple of times, and went back to my 18-55 lens, which is a pleasure to work with.

After I open the box when the 5. 6mm f/1. 2 R lens arrived, I was dismayed to the sound of the f-stop ring. I read some reviews that mentioned the noise. Still, I could not believe Fuji would produce such a noisy lens.

So, this week, I went to B&H and tested a new lens. The difference is remarkable. Hence, the price I payed for the one purchased for this lens in eBay, isn’t worth it.

[First impressions after testing on an X-T3] Image Quality: The sharpness is very good wide open and it gets very crisp at f/2. 8, and the bokeh is nice. There doesn’t seem to be much to complain about, much like Fuji’s other new prime lenses.

Focusing: -It uses a DC Motor which makes soft whirring sounds that’s audible in quiet environments. Probably the only times it’ll be an annoyance is when pushing its limits, such as focusing from far-to-near quickly and when it hunts for focus.

The sounds might be an issue for video work. -Autofocus is behind Linear Motors in speed and confidence. It doesn’t seem bad, but it doesn’t match the other lenses in this generation. -Manual focusing is very sensitive, and it makes a little stepping sounds due to its DC Motor.

This could be spun as a positive because it gives a slight audible & physical feedback whereas a Linear Motor has virtually no feedback. Aperture Ring: -The aperture ring has very soft indents when turning (at least on my copy) which can make it easy to bump out of place, but it also makes for easy 1-finger operation.

For comparison, it requires noticeably more force to adjust the aperture ring on the new 23 & 33 with 2 fingers than to adjust the aperture ring on this 56 with just 1 finger – it’s a big difference.

Conclusion: If this had a Linear Motor it would’ve felt more modern. Everything else about the lens seems good so far, although the aperture ring might bother some.

I’m a photography enthusiast enjoying nature/hiking, portrait, travel, cycling, and paddling. Converted from Nikon D300s and a bunch of lenses to Fuji X-T3 a few years ago. Switched because smaller, lighter, and the locations of controls.

Controls that bring me back to my first Olympus OM1 SLR in 1979. Not a gear guy, but love manual controls. Finding that I leave the 33mm f/1. 4 on my camera the most. My main lens before was either the 18-55 f/2.

8-4 that is a great lens with OIS for low light, and the 23mm f/2 WR also spent a lot of time on the camera because fo the WR and being outside. I prefer prime lenses, but don’t like to carry a lot of gear.

The 33mm replaced my 23mm because of focal length preference and especially for portraits. Like it more than my 18-55 with the f/1. 4 for better depth of field option and WR. Low light capability is great, but the zoom with OIS and higher ISO of XT3 less of a need.

Reviewing my photos shot with my zoom in editing, I find that I use the 33mm focal length the most. I’m not a pixel counter, but my pics using primes seem best to me. Given I like to travel light, the weight of this lens was a concern I had compared to the Fuji 35mm f/1.

4 option. The 33mm is not a heavy lens and found the size works great for me. The WR is important because I spend a lot of time outdoors in areas like the ADKs to the South West desert. I still need my other focal lengths for composition; I can move my feet to get close when needed.

For travel, I’ll probably bring along my zoom and the 33mm and a 16mm f/2. 8 WR. I love my 90mm f/2 if doing portraits or animals, but too heavy to just carry around. But looks like this 33mm will end on my camera most of the time for me.

Well built for the price. The aperture ring has a satisfying clicking to it but it is a fixed wide angle lens. It’ll have limited uses but its a nice lens for photographing rooms or large landscapes.

Note this is for canon ef-M lenses aka small mirrorless cameras. Not compatible with larger DSLRs or SLRs.

It’s wonderful to have a true anamorphic lens for my Sony a7III without worrying about adapters or compatibility, and paying less than $1k for it! I rarely use auto focus even with my other e-mount lenses.

There’s no stabilization but footage always looks better on a gimbal or rig anyway. My two slight disappointments are that there is not really any oval boke in the center of the image, and I THINK something is misaligned because the inevitable vignetting that happens with a cropped lens on a full frame sensor is actually slightly offset.

So even in s35 mode, my IBIS will force some of that vignetting to pop into frame but mostly on one side. I actually like vignetting but it’s odd to see it off-center like that. The only solution I’ve found is to increase the digital zoom on the sensor but I end up losing FOV.

But to be clear, I’m not knocking it for vignetting or for being a cropped lens as I chose to buy this over the company’s full frame line for cost reasons. Those two reasons are why my review isn’t 5 stars, because I’m getting what I wanted out of this lens more or less, and it’s beautiful!.

As you unwrap the packaging you get a slight hint of that Cinema smell that lets you know it isn’t just a lens you can get anywhere but a high quality cine lens. And the joy you get as you open the box and see the massive glass element.

The packaging is amazing on this lens i had no worries about it being damaged or broke. The mount is tight and smooth, the focus ring and Iris ring is very tactile and buttery smooth. The overall quality is outstanding and the image you get from this lens can make even the worst shot look decent! Now i do have to grips about the lens but are by far not a big problem.

The first is it being only a 1. 33 anamorphic when you desqueeze the image the black bars are just not enough you still have to add a little more to them in post. My second one is that the image from the lens comes out a little on the warm side, i shoot in Log so this isn’t a problem just something to be aware of.

Although I had done my fair share of research on this lens, I was still hesitant before purchasing it. As a student, this was not something I could purchase “just for fun” and I needed a solid lens that would give me the look I was going for in as many shoots possible.

The Sirui 35mm did not disappoint! I was so excited to test it out , which I did in broad daylight and night – and it gave me exactly what I was looking for , sharp and cinematic image with beautiful anamorphic flares.

I just note, it’s a bit heavy for my Sony a6400 but I can’t complain. If you don’t own a full frame sensor camera and still aim for that cinematic look, I highly recommend. 35mm- not too wide and not too tight.

Perfect.

This lens is incredible! I purchased the L-Mount version and I’m using it on the original SL (Typ 601). Everyone always wants to know if the lens is sharp. Answer: A resounding yes! But there is a lot more to a lens than sharpness alone.

What about the character? Most modern lenses have almost no character, however, after buying this lens and also trying the 90mm f2. 8 and the 35mm f2, I find that they all draw similarly and offer the same look and feel to the images.

And yes, there is a feeling. It’s very creamy and dreamy wide open yet with a pinpoint sharpness that is never harsh. The best way to describe the look is cinematic. Highly recommended! If you are considering this lens and have never owned a Sigma product (I haven’t owned a Sigma lens since the mid ’80s), please do yourself a favor and spend an hour on Sigma’s website to learn not only about this I-Series of Contemporary lenses but about the philosophy behind them as well.

And also about the build quality and engineering and design. Finally, look into the company. They are not a typical company but are very different and very special.

I can tell this lens is going to be amazing but I knew ahead of time that I might need to purchase the usb dock and do the firmware update. At first, I was super happy with the lens just testing at Thanksgiving with some candids with my family, it seemed to focus much faster than my Canon 50mm.

But, then I took it with me for an actual session with a new client (which maybe I shouldn’t of done) but I was excited!! Anyway, there were times that I could not get it to focus at all! Nothing I did would get the focus to work.

It became frustrating! One of the things that appealed to me with the Sigma lens was reviews talking about very little chromatic aberration. My edit time for this session was wayyyyy tooo long trying to fix the chromatic aberration.

It was worse than my Canon lens. I’m really hoping that after the firmware update, some of these issues go away because it will be hard to have this as a go to lens with these issues. This lens is super heavy!!! Just giving a heads up on that! Other than that, when it would focus, it was fast to focus! My images are pretty dang sharp and I’m excited to see what this lens can do with the update.

Pretty awful at 1. 4 aperture when set to infinity. Hazy, plenty of chromatic aberration, light areas bleeding to darker areas. Interestingly, when focus is set to 1. 5 or 2 feet, image is much better, even wide open.

Looks like this lens is optimized for closer focusing, not infinity. This may be intentional, since not only professional reviewers, but amateurs also prefer to perform resolution tests at smaller distances, which is much easier to do.

Lens manufacturers may have already noticed that. When closed down to 2. 8, image quality improves significantly, it appears that at 2. 8 it will be possible to get quality images of night sky with stars.

But I didn’t try it yet on the sky, it is my presumption only. Of course, in the corners there will be some blur visible, but since the print size of starry night is limited by noise anyway to about 11×14, that blur in the corners may not be objectionable.

At 5. 6 all problems seem to disappear, and the image quality and resolution is excellent, up to about 11. Three stars, not five because 1. 4 and 2. 0 apertures are pretty much useless. Also because this is the second lens, first one purchased from the other vendor had too much chromatic aberrations for my taste and was returned.

That one from Adorama is a little bit better. But I still think it is not assembled correctly. Comparing it to my Minolta AF 24mm which was manufactured in 90-ties probably, resolution is similar, but Minolta suffers from more color fringing and coma.

More than 20, perhaps 30 years passed after Minolta lens was made, and the progress in optical quality is not that big indeed, in spite of using aspherical and low dispersion glass and overall advance in optical science.

My assumption is that designers of that lens might have done a good job, but the manufacturing process is sloppy and they can’t assemble all that elements properly. This results in great variation of optical quality among these lenses.

I wanted this lens for milky way and fireflies. I only have had one day to shoot the Milky Way since I got this lens. There was a lot of light pollution and I shot at f/1. 4. I wasn’t impressed with the results.

I read up and tested the lens for decentering using a large brink wall, at infinity, focusing in the center, starting at f/1. 4, then stopping down. At f/1. 4 the center and right field are sharp but the left edge is soft from the top to the bottom of the frame.

It takes 3 stops, between f/2 and f/2. 8 before the lens is sharp through out. I showed my results to two professional photographers who have experience with this lens and they said these are good results for this lens, so I am planning on keeping it.

I will stop it down. In the past I had ordered the 14 mm. It would not focus anywhere. After I returned the 14 mm I was told by other photographers it takes an average of 3 returns before you get a good Rokinon lens.

I was prepared to return it 3 times before giving up. This was the first time I ordered the 24 mm f/1. 4. I need to have clear, dark skies to test it out more. One other important note. When I got the Rokinon I removed the back lens cap and with one hand placed it on the canon lens I had taken of my 5D Mark IV.

The Rokinon rear lens cap jammed onto my lens. I could not get it off. I had to take it to someone to remove it. They had trouble. I have heard of filters jamming, but not rear lens caps. I will only use canon lens rear caps with this lens.

I’m on my third (second is on its way back, third on the way here. ) This is just *the* lens for starscapes especially if you have a full-frame camera that has a nice fat sensor to pair it with (like my 5d3).

It has a very wide aperture, a nice field of view and being fully manual matters not when you’re setting it all up on a tripod with all the time in the world to make your adjustments and get everything set for the shot.

The problem is that a lot of these lenses suffer from decentering problems out of the box, and so you have to check them very, very carefully. The best way to do it to avoid mistakes (calling a lens bad that isn’t or the other way around) is to actually shoot some starscapes and look not only at the center but all four corners.

No coma problems and the center is nicely focused? All good. Got coma in a corner or (worse) on one entire side? Not good. I’ve now had two with fairly material problems in different places; the last was on the entire left side of the frame.

Both were unacceptably bad which is really maddening and in the second case from about 1/3rd of the frame in from the left side all the way to the right edge, including the corners was *razor* sharp, so the lens is definitely capable of the sort of performance others have raved about — IF you get a good one.

I’m hoping the third one is a charm, because I really, really want to like this lens and keep it — it grabs light like nobody’s business. But if it won’t stick the light on the sensor coherently, well.

Thus far no cigar — I will update if I get a good one on the next turn-around. I’m giving it one more try before it goes back for a refund and I give up. Third time’s the charm, right? If you want this lens for landscapes then you *probably* won’t notice even fairly-serious decentering unless you look real closely.

If you intend to shoot the night sky with it, however then it’s an entirely different matter and you either get a good one or you don’t.

Having recently entered the Micro Four Thirds world of photography with the purchase of a Panasonic Lumix GX8, I was keen to see what the 20. 3MP sensor could do, so I needed some quality glass. Looking around, reading and watching video reviews by the bucket load, the Sigma ‘Art’ range of lenses were getting very good reviews for image quality and I couldn’t believe the prices.

A quality prime for well under 200? So, I thought I’d try one and opted for the 60mm f2. 8. The build is surprisingly good. The focus ring, with the absence of a rubberised ring or textured plastic ring, is the same smooth metal of the lens barrel.

The focus ring turns smoothy with a nice ‘resistance’ about it so you know it’s doing something. The build is overall, very good especially for the price. It looks great on my all black Lumix GX8, but what about the image quality? Well, this lens is sharp.

Very sharp and creates beautiful images from the 20. 3MP sensor in the GX8. Nice contrast, accurate colour rendering and minimal chromatic aberrations (if any). There is no lens based image stabilisation, which isn’t an issue for cameras that feature in body options like the GX8, GX7 and the various Olympus offerings.

In short, this is a beautiful lens. I’m so impressed, especially at this price point, Iwill be adding the 30mm and 19mm in the same range to my collection as soon as possible.

The Sigma 60MM F2. 8 DN art for Sony E mount is one of the lenses that is brought up when talking about the best lens for the best price. I am using as a camera the Sony A6300. The price of this lens is incredible for the IQ and sharpness that it has.

I compared it to a few Zeiss lenses and found that for the whole lot of more money that the Zeiss requires to get into my camera bag, the Sigma 60 is by far a better deal. Comparing images with the Zeiss lenses (three of them), I found that the Sigma 60 was as sharp as and sometimes sharper overall than all three of the Zeiss lenses.

Distortion of the Sigma 60 was slight. The Sigma lenses do not have image stabilization and that is OK for me. I use as a video lens a 55-210 Sony lens with Optical Stabilization System (OSS). I own all three of the Sigma prime lenses.

the 60, the 30 and the 19. The 60 and 30 are the art lenses and the 19, which is also an art lens will be replaced by an older 19 that has the rubber focus ring. I would highly recommend all three of the prime Sigma lenses.

The 19, 30 and 60 are inexpensive top of the line in quality lenses that are very sharp and have excellent Image Quality. You cannot go wrong with any of them.

I bought this lens as I have a small Sony a6000 which I use for holidays. Taking all the pro gear makes it a bit like a busman’s holiday and annoys “senior management”, so I travel light these days. This little lens is a stunner in performance for its size and weight, although I do have some concerns about its long term durability.

Already, after only one holiday trip, some of the white text on it is starting to rub off and the plastic seems to be quite soft. Having said that, I’m not going to be treating it roughly, so it should be fine for travel use.

As a portrait lens, it is superb, with a good bokeh, but at a 90mm equivalent on 35mm, it is also a nice short telephoto, when you want to get a bit closer in, or for some discreet street photography whilst traveling.