Month: September 2025

The Sigma 35mm f/1.2 Mark II is improved in every single way over the original, and in this review I want to walk through why this lens is such a big deal for wedding and commercial filmmakers. I’ll cover the obvious upgrades, but I’ll also point out a few important improvements that I rarely see mentioned and that actually matter a lot when you are filming real jobs.

A quick look back at the original Sigma 35mm f/1.2

When the original Sigma 35mm f/1.2 came out back in 2019, I filmed an entire wedding with it from start to finish. I loved the low light performance and the bokeh, but at the same time, the lens felt a bit ahead of its time.

It was impressive, but it also had some rough edges that made it feel like a first-generation product.

The biggest issue by far was the size and weight. That lens was an absolute chonker. It weighed nearly two and a half pounds, was thick, long, and packed with glass. It felt like Sigma saying, “Yes, this is one of the first f/1.2 lenses, and yes, it has compromises.”

After filming a full wedding day handheld, my arms definitely felt it. The image quality was there, but the physical toll was real.

The Mark II size and weight improvements are massive

This is where the Sigma 35mm f/1.2 Mark II immediately shines.

Sigma managed to make the lens about 20 percent smaller, coming in at 113mm instead of 136mm, and roughly 30 percent lighter at 744 grams instead of 1090 grams. That is a huge difference in real-world use.

For some context, the Sony 50mm f/1.2 GM weighs 778 grams, which means this Sigma 35mm f/1.2 is actually lighter than Sony’s 50mm f/1.2. That’s wild.

Even more impressive, the Mark II is roughly the same length as Sigma’s 35mm f/1.4, while still letting in significantly more light. Sigma clearly did some serious optical and mechanical wizardry here.

At this point, I have zero hesitation recommending this lens for all-day handheld filmmaking or for use on a gimbal. Even smaller DJI gimbals handle it without issue.

Smaller filters and familiar controls

Another welcome improvement is the filter thread size. The Mark II uses 72mm filters instead of the massive 82mm filters on the original. That alone saves money and makes life easier if you already own a set of ND filters.

As far as buttons and controls go, Sigma stuck with what works, and that’s a good thing. You get a programmable button, an aperture ring that can be clicked or de-clicked and locked, and an AF/MF switch.

Sigma standardized this layout across their lenses a while ago, and it continues to be one of the best third-party control designs out there.

Autofocus issues from the original are gone

This is one of the most important improvements for filmmakers.

With the original Sigma 35mm f/1.2, I ran into a frustrating autofocus issue while filming weddings. If focus was racked too far toward minimum focus distance and then I tried to focus on something far away, autofocus would sometimes just give up.

It happened most often on dark dance floors, which is already one of the hardest environments for autofocus. The workaround was to manually nudge focus back toward the middle so autofocus could re-engage, but that is not something you want to deal with during a live event.

Thankfully, this issue is completely gone on the Mark II.

I tested autofocus in bright light, low light, and across a wide range of distances, and it consistently locked on and stayed locked. The updated magnetic autofocus motors clearly make a difference, and performance was fast, accurate, and reliable.

Focus breathing and manual focus behavior

For filmmakers, focus breathing matters, and I’m happy to report that while the Sigma 35mm f/1.2 Mark II does have a small amount of breathing, it is minimal.

This is especially impressive considering this lens does not have access to Sony’s focus breathing compensation since it is a third-party lens. Sigma told me they prioritized minimizing breathing, and it really shows.

If you are using the L-mount version, you also get the option to switch between linear and non-linear manual focus in-camera, which is a great feature. On Sony E-mount, the lens is always linear, which I personally prefer for video work.

Image quality and that f/1.2 look

Even without doing a direct side-by-side comparison, image quality on this lens is outstanding.

Sigma has been absolutely crushing it lately when it comes to bokeh, and this lens fits right in alongside lenses like the 135mm f/1.8 and the 200mm f/2. The background separation is beautiful, smooth, and cinematic.

There is something special about having f/1.2 depth of field on a 35mm lens. It gives you shallow depth while still maintaining a wide enough field of view to be incredibly versatile.

There’s a reason I filmed nearly an entire wedding day with the original 35mm f/1.2. It works on a gimbal, works handheld, and lets you get close when you need to. A 35mm focal length can truly do almost everything.

Should filmmakers buy the Sigma 35mm f/1.2 Mark II?

If you want incredible bokeh, excellent low light performance, reliable autofocus, and a lens that is now actually reasonable to use all day, this lens is an easy recommendation.

The Mark II fixes the biggest issues of the original while keeping everything that made it special in the first place. For wedding and commercial filmmakers, this is one of the most versatile and visually impressive lenses you can buy.

I highly recommend it!

The iPhone 17 Pro just introduced two massive upgrades for filmmakers, and one of them is genuinely surprising. In fact, it is a world first for a smartphone.

Apple has been steadily pushing the iPhone closer to dedicated video cameras, and with the iPhone 17 Pro, that momentum continues in a big way. Let’s break down the two features that matter most if you create video.

A Completely New Front Camera for Video

The first upgrade was heavily rumored and widely expected: a new front facing camera.

Apple last made a meaningful upgrade to the selfie camera all the way back with the iPhone 11. Since then, it has remained mostly unchanged. While it was usable on the iPhone 16 Pro, the rear cameras had advanced so much that many creators started using MagSafe mounted monitors just so they could record with the back camera while still seeing themselves.

With the iPhone 17 lineup, Apple finally addressed this.

All iPhone 17 models now feature a significantly upgraded selfie camera, but the real innovation is not just resolution or image quality. It is the sensor shape itself.

Why the Square Sensor Matters

Instead of using a traditional horizontal sensor, the new front camera uses a square sensor design. This is something you usually see in 360 cameras. DJI’s Osmo 360 is a great example.

The benefit of a square sensor is flexibility.

If you want to film vertical video, the camera crops the sides of the sensor. If you want to film horizontal video, it crops the top and bottom. The key advantage is that you no longer need to rotate your phone just to change orientation.

Because the resolution remains the same either way, you can keep holding your phone vertically and still capture high quality horizontal video. Considering how often we naturally hold our phones upright, this is a surprisingly smart move by Apple.

ProRes RAW Comes to the iPhone

The second major upgrade is the one that caught me completely off guard.

Apple has officially added ProRes RAW internal recording to the iPhone 17 Pro.

After introducing ProRes video on the iPhone 14 and Apple Log on the iPhone 15, Apple slowed down major video upgrades with the iPhone 16. The iPhone 17 Pro makes up for that pause in a big way.

ProRes RAW is a widely used raw video format that, until recently, required an external recorder. Over the past year, more cameras have started supporting internal RAW recording, and now the iPhone has joined that list.

Apple Log 2 and Potential Dynamic Range Gains

Alongside ProRes RAW, Apple has also introduced Apple Log 2.

Apple says this new version offers a wider color gamut, which raises an interesting question about dynamic range. It is unclear whether dynamic range has actually improved, but this is something I will be testing extensively.

If Apple Log 2 delivers even a modest improvement, it could make the iPhone 17 Pro an even more serious option for professional video workflows.

Why Internal RAW Took So Long

There are two main reasons ProRes RAW did not arrive on the iPhone sooner.

First, RED previously held the patent for internal RAW recording and aggressively defended it. Apple even lost a court case over this years ago. In 2024, Nikon acquired RED, and since then, the company appears to be far more flexible with licensing. That shift has opened the door for internal RAW recording across many brands, including Apple.

The second reason is heat and processing power.

ProRes RAW creates extremely large files and generates significant heat. With the iPhone 17 Pro now using a vapor chamber cooling system, Apple finally has the thermal headroom needed to support this feature reliably.

Internal Storage vs External SSD Recording

One big question remains: will ProRes RAW be limited to external SSD recording?

It is possible Apple will allow ProRes RAW recording to external storage using the native Camera app. At the same time, third party apps like Blackmagic Camera may support recording ProRes RAW directly to internal storage.

This could also explain why Apple now offers a 2TB version of the iPhone 17 Pro. Recording 4K ProRes RAW footage fills storage incredibly fast.

More Video Upgrades Are Coming

Beyond these headline features, there are several additional improvements that filmmakers will appreciate. These include new rear camera sensors, improved anti reflective screen coating, and a new telephoto zoom option.

I will be testing all of these features in depth and sharing my full iPhone 17 Pro review from a filmmaker’s perspective very soon.

The final boss of portrait lenses is here!

Sigma just did something that has literally never been done before. This is the world’s first 135mm f/1.4 lens, and it produces some of the most beautiful, buttery, beard-grabbing bokeh I’ve ever seen.

In this article, I’m reviewing the Sigma 135mm f/1.4 from the perspective of a wedding videographer and corporate and commercial filmmaker, and helping you decide if this lens is actually worth buying and where it shines the most.

Why This Lens Is a Big Deal

We’ve had plenty of f/1.4 lenses.
We’ve had plenty of 135mm lenses.

But we have never had a 135mm lens with an f/1.4 aperture!

Sigma pulled it off, and I love that they continue to release unique lenses instead of the same safe designs everyone else is making. This lens exists because Sigma is willing to do things other brands won’t.

Why I Love the 135mm Focal Length

I’ve owned the Sony Zeiss 135mm f/1.8 and the Sony 135mm f/1.8 GM, and I keep coming back to this focal length for one reason. It has a very specific look.

A 135mm lens is perfect for head-and-shoulders shots of a single person or a couple. You get incredible compression on the subject while the background just melts away, even at f/1.8.

So naturally, the question is… what if you could have more?

More background separation.
More low-light performance.
More melty-ness?

Sigma answered that question by actually building it.

Size, Weight, and Handling

Yes, this lens is bigger than other 135mm lenses, especially up front. That’s expected when you’re dealing with an f/1.4 aperture at this focal length.

That said, it’s not as massive as I expected it to be.

The lens feels short and stubby rather than long and unwieldy. Honestly, it feels like a big telephoto lens that got hit with a shrink ray.

One interesting design choice is the included tripod collar. Usually, you only see these on very heavy lenses to help balance weight, but this lens is only about one pound heavier than the Sony 135mm f/1.8, which does not include a collar.

The good news is that the tripod collar is removable, and personally, I’d probably take it off for most of my filming.

Build Quality and Controls

From a build standpoint, this feels like a modern, high-end Sigma lens.

You get:

• A large 105mm front filter thread
• Two programmable buttons
• An aperture ring that can be locked or de-clicked
• A dedicated autofocus and manual focus switch

Everything feels solid, well-built, and professional.

Autofocus and Focus Breathing

Autofocus performance was fast and reliable in all of my testing, which lines up with my experience using other newer Sigma lenses.

There is some focus breathing, similar to Sigma’s 200mm lens, but the amount of bokeh this lens produces hides most of it. In real-world use, I don’t think it’s a problem at all.

Overall, focus breathing is minimal, especially considering that Sigma lenses do not support Sony’s focus breathing compensation feature.

Image Quality and Bokeh

This is what you actually care about.

With this much glass, the image quality is absolutely gorgeous.

I’ve always loved the look of a 135mm at f/1.8 because of the compression and bokeh, and this lens takes that look and pushes it even further. Shooting wide open at f/1.4 gives you an insanely shallow depth of field.

You can have an eye in focus but not an eyelash. It genuinely feels like the camera is focusing on the iris itself, while the rest of the eye starts to fall out of focus.

That kind of depth of field is wild.

Autofocus is good enough to keep up, but if you’re trying to pull focus manually while handheld, even subtle body movement from breathing can shift focus. This is not a lens you casually manual focus at f/1.4 unless the camera is locked down.

Real-World Use for Filmmakers

If you film weddings, interviews, or talking head content, this lens is ridiculous in the best way.

You could be filming in a venue with a mediocre background, look through this lens, and suddenly ask yourself, “What background?”

It’s gone. The bokeh has completely eaten it.

Your subject pops off the frame so aggressively that it almost feels like they were cut out and placed on a green screen.

And honestly, I have zero complaints about that.

Final Thoughts

If you already love the 135mm focal length and didn’t think it could get any better, this lens proves that it absolutely can.

The Sigma 135mm f/1.4 is big, bold, unapologetic, and incredibly beautiful. It’s not for everyone, but if extreme subject separation, compression, and cinematic depth are your thing, this lens is very special.

Thanks for reading, and have a great day.

Is this the FX3 killer?

Nikon and RED have officially released their first fully collaborative camera, and on paper, it looks wildly competitive. Internal RED RAW and Nikon RAW, excellent Nikon autofocus, 32-bit float audio with no adapter, one of the largest screens on a mirrorless camera, and a $2200 price tag.

That is the new Nikon ZR.

But there is one big question: without a fan, how does it handle heat during long shoots like outdoor wedding ceremonies?

I’m reviewing the Nikon ZR from the perspective of a wedding, documentary, and commercial filmmaker to help you decide if this camera is worth buying.

First Impressions and Camera Body Design

When you first pick up the ZR, it feels far more like a Nikon mirrorless camera than a RED camera. Traditional RED cameras are boxy and require full rigs with rails, handles, and accessories. The ZR is different.

This camera has a grip, a built in screen, and can easily be handheld without any rigging. That sets the tone for the entire experience.

Overall, the ZR feels about 70 percent Nikon and 30 percent RED. That is not a bad thing, but if you are coming from a traditional RED camera, there will be an adjustment.

A Huge Screen That Changes Everything

One of the best design choices on the ZR is the rear screen.

The FX3 has a 3 inch screen. The ZR has a 4 inch screen. That may not sound dramatic, but in real use, it feels significantly larger and far easier to see.

The screen is bright, sharp, and works extremely well outdoors. Touch controls are responsive and thoughtfully designed. While it is not fully articulating without flipping out first, that is not a dealbreaker for me.

There is no EVF on this camera, which reinforces that it is built for video first. The FX3 does not have an EVF either, but the ZR’s larger screen makes that easier to live with.

The Weirdest Card Slot Choice I’ve Seen in Years

Now we need to talk about the strangest design decision on this camera.

When you open the battery door, you will find two card slots. One is a CFexpress Type B slot, which is exactly what you want. The other is a microSD card slot that can only record H.264 or H.265.

Yes, microSD.

This is confusing and honestly hard to justify. It is not another CFexpress slot or even a full size SD card slot.

Even worse, the ZR cannot record to both card slots at the same time, just like other Nikon cameras. That means no true backup recording.

My hope is that Nikon adds proxy recording to the microSD slot via firmware. That would actually make this choice useful.

Until then, it is something you will have to accept if you want this camera.

Sensor Specs and Video Performance

The ZR uses the Nikon Z mount, giving you access to native Nikon lenses and a huge selection of adapted glass.

Inside, it features a partially stacked sensor with 7.5 stops of in body image stabilization. Dual ISO sits at 800 and 6400. Video specs include:

• Up to 6K at 60fps in full frame
• 4K at 120fps with a 1.5x crop

The FX3 offers a smaller crop at 4K 120fps, but personally I shoot 60fps far more often, so this does not bother me.

If these specs sound familiar, that is because the ZR shares its sensor with the Nikon Z6 III, which I still consider one of the best value cameras Nikon has ever made.

Aggressive Pricing That Makes No Sense (In a Good Way)

Here’s where things get interesting.

The Z6 III launched at $2500. The ZR is a more video focused camera, built in collaboration with RED, and it costs $2200.

That is not how this usually works.

Sony, Panasonic, and Canon all charge more for their cinema focused versions. Nikon did the opposite.

Considering the FX3 now costs around $4100, the ZR comes in at nearly half the price.

That alone makes it impossible to ignore.

Internal RAW Recording in Three Formats

This is the headline feature.

The ZR supports three internal RAW formats, which is the widest RAW support I have ever seen in a camera.

Nikon N-RAW

N-RAW has always looked fantastic and plays back smoothly in DaVinci Resolve. It is reliable, efficient, and easy to work with.

ProRes RAW

ProRes RAW is here as well, but support across editing software is still limited. I personally struggle to recommend it unless your workflow demands it.

RED RAW

Yes, this camera records RED RAW internally. This has never existed outside of a dedicated RED box camera.

There are limitations. It is 12 bit instead of 16 bit, and compression options are fixed. That may be a dealbreaker for some, but remember the price. This is still the cheapest RED camera ever made.

More importantly, the color science matches RED cameras incredibly well, making it a fantastic match for multi camera shoots.

Autofocus That Actually Matters

One of my biggest hopes for this Nikon and RED collaboration was Nikon’s autofocus.

Thankfully, it is excellent.

Autofocus is fast, reliable, and capable of detecting people, animals, and objects. It is fully competitive with Sony and Canon.

Considering RED cameras have never been known for strong autofocus, this is one of the biggest upgrades RED has ever received.

32 Bit Float Audio Done the Right Way

This might be my favorite feature.

The ZR supports internal 32 bit float audio recording through the 3.5mm microphone jack. No adapter required.

Panasonic cameras require a $500 XLR adapter for this. Other cameras require external recorders. The ZR does not.

Plug in a shotgun mic, lav, or wireless system, and you get 32 bit float audio internally.

That keeps rigs smaller, lighter, and far simpler.

Wireless 32 Bit Float with Hollyland Lark Max 2

I tested the ZR with the Hollyland Lark Max 2, which supports full chain 32 bit float audio.

Running the receiver into the ZR’s mic jack works flawlessly. I recovered audio that was clipped by over 20dB with no issues.

It is genuinely impressive.

Timecode and Ports

The ZR supports timecode over Bluetooth or HDMI, just like previous Nikon cameras.

It does use a micro HDMI port, which is not ideal, but the 4 inch screen makes an external monitor less necessary for many shooters.

There is no dedicated timecode port, so Tentacle or Deity systems will need to use the mic input.

Overheating Tests in Texas Heat

This was my biggest concern.

The FX3 has a fan. The ZR does not.

I tested two ZR cameras outdoors in direct sunlight at 91 degrees Fahrenheit. One recorded 6K 60fps RED RAW. The other recorded 6K 24fps RED RAW.

The results were shocking.

• 6K 60fps recorded for 1 hour, 21 minutes before overheating
• 6K 24fps recorded for over 1 hour, 23 minutes with no warnings

The 24fps camera likely would have lasted until the battery died.

This performance is closer to the Sony a7S III than anything else, and that is excellent news.

Final Verdict: Is the ZR an FX3 Killer?

In many ways, yes.

• Higher resolution
• Internal RED RAW and Nikon RAW
• 32 bit float audio with no adapter
• Larger screen
• Nearly half the price

There are compromises though. The microSD card slot is strange. There is no dual card recording. There is no fan.

But at $2200, this camera is absurdly competitive.

It feels more Nikon than RED, and that will matter depending on your background. For me, that familiarity is a positive.

When you compare the ZR to a $4100 FX3, it is very hard not to call this an FX3 killer.

Let me know what you think!