Im trying to kit out my S5II for some portrait sessions I have coming up next month and honestly my bank account is hurting a bit. Im torn between the Sigma 85mm f1.4 DG DN and the Lumix 85mm f1.8. The Sigma is obviously the dream but its a huge chunk of change and honestly kind of heavy to carry around all day. The Lumix is way more budget friendly but I worry about the sharpness compared to the Sigma. Is the extra cost for the Sigma actually worth it for paid work or should I just save the cash for lighting gear and go with the Lumix instead?
Just catching up on this thread. Honestly, I've had some mixed experiences with the newer third-party glass lately. Unfortunately, I found the auto-focus on the Sigma 85mm f1.4 DG DN Art to be a bit inconsistent during high-speed shoots, which was a huge letdown given the price tag. If you really want to save some cash but need reliable results for paid sessions, check out these instead:
- Panasonic Lumix S 50mm f1.8
- It is surprisingly sharp and gives you way more room to move in tight spaces.
- Sigma 35mm f2 DG DN Contemporary
- A bit wider, but the build quality is far more consistent for professional work. My top tip: head over to LensTip or check the MTF charts on the DXOMARK site before pulling the trigger. It saved me from buying gear that just sat on the shelf.
> Is the extra cost for the Sigma actually worth it for paid work or should I just save the cash for lighting gear and go with the Lumix instead? Honestly, I totally get the hesitation. I spent ages agonizing over this exact trade-off when I first started my business! I went a different route and picked up the Sigma 105mm f2.8 DG DN MACRO Art instead of the 85mm primes, and wow, it was a game changer for me. See, with portraits, the sharpness is obviously huge, but the compression you get from that extra focal length is just magic for flattering subjects. The detail is absolutely insane—like, count-every-eyelash kind of sharp! It's built like a tank, which gives me so much peace of mind when I'm out on location. I dont worry about it bumping into things at all. Sure, it's not f1.4, but the separation is still fantastic and it saves you a ton of cash compared to the big Art primes. If you really want that high-end look without breaking the bank, maybe look for a used Sigma 85mm f1.4 DG DN Art if you can find a solid deal. But really, spending that extra money on a good strobe setup will elevate your work way more than a slightly wider aperture will. Good light is everything! Let me know if you want tips on setting up some basic modifiers for those shoots!
> Is the extra cost for the Sigma actually worth it for paid work or should I just save the cash for lighting gear and go with the Lumix instead? Honestly, save the cash for your lighting. I have used the Panasonic Lumix S 85mm f1.8 on my S5II for a year now and I am perfectly satisfied with the results. It is tack sharp where it counts and the autofocus tracking is flawless for portrait sessions. While the Sigma 85mm f1.4 DG DN Art is technically superior in terms of bokeh rendering and absolute light gathering, the Lumix is much easier to manage handheld all day. Put the savings into a solid strobe setup and you will see a way bigger difference in your final images than the slight sharpness gain from the Sigma. No complaints here, it just works.
Honestly, I spent a lot of time thinking about this while grabbing coffee. Before you pull the trigger on either, it really depends on the look you're chasing for these sessions.
- How much space do you usually have in your studio or location?
- Are you shooting mostly headshots or full-body portraits? The reason I ask is that the distance you need to keep from your subject changes everything for how comfortable they feel, and that matters way more for the final result than pure lens sharpness. I'm really happy with my setup, but I had to figure out my preferred working distance first. Once you know that, it might make the choice between those two super obvious.
