Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk
Thread started 10 Nov 2016 (Thursday) 07:18
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

50 sigma art vs. canon 50 1.2

 
delmama
Senior Member
delmama's Avatar
533 posts
Joined Sep 2009
Nov 10, 2016 07:18 |  #1

What are your thoughts? is there a HUGE difference between these 2 lenses? I want to purchase it but I can't decide which one is better, I read the sigma art is a great lens, but will it beat the canon 1.2?


Websiteexternal link
Facebookexternal link
Newborn and Child photographer.
Hand knitted props for photographers.

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
kf095
Cream of the Crop
kf095's Avatar
Joined Dec 2009
Canada, Ontario, Milton
Nov 10, 2016 12:47 |  #2

Here we do again... Will it beat Canon at 1.2? Oh, wait, it doesn't have 1.2 AT ALL. So, no "vs". And, yes, sigma is great lens. And heavy. Like pig big and heavy for 50 1.4.


Old Site (external link). M-E and ME blog (external link). Film Flickr (external link). my DigitaL and AnaLog Gear.

LOG IN TO REPLY
delmama
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
delmama's Avatar
533 posts
Joined Sep 2009
Nov 10, 2016 14:55 as a reply to kf095's post |  #3

I know this is a VERY common question :-D I had canon 50 1.4 and loved it! now just curious if the 1.2 will be worth the upgrade or stick with sigma art!


Websiteexternal link
Facebookexternal link
Newborn and Child photographer.
Hand knitted props for photographers.

LOG IN TO REPLY
scobols
Goldmember
scobols's Avatar
Joined Dec 2006
Waconia, MN
Nov 10, 2016 15:00 |  #4

In general, if you're a pixel peeper and want tack sharp photos, the Sigma is your lens. If you want something a little smaller and "slightly" faster, the Canon is your lens. The Canon has a unique look to it (some will say) but your clients won't notice the difference. And they probably won't notice the sharpness difference either.

Scott


www.scottbolster.comexternal link
facebookexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
delmama
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
delmama's Avatar
533 posts
Joined Sep 2009
Nov 10, 2016 17:03 as a reply to scobols's post |  #5

how would you describe that "unique look" of the canon 1.2?


Websiteexternal link
Facebookexternal link
Newborn and Child photographer.
Hand knitted props for photographers.

LOG IN TO REPLY
scobols
Goldmember
scobols's Avatar
Joined Dec 2006
Waconia, MN
Post has been edited 11 months ago by scobols.
Nov 10, 2016 18:01 as a reply to delmama's post |  #6

Well, it's very subtle and some would even argue it doesn't exist. I believe it's a combination of both the creamy bokeh and the slight softness of the lens. It's why people love this lens even though it's not the sharpest.

Take a look at a few lens sample archives, one here on POTN (http://photography-on-the.net .../showthread.php?t=1​339950) and one on Flickr (https://www.flickr.com​/groups/20778516@N00/p​ool/ (external link)). After that, take a look at a Sigma 50mm Art sample archive (http://photography-on-the.net .../showthread.php?t=1​374830) and see if you notice anything different. It's hard to explain, some see it, some don't. Your clients most likely will not.

One other thing I should mention is that a lot of people struggle using the Canon 50 f/1.2 when they first purchase it and end up selling it. Those who stick with it and really learn to use it tend to love it.

Scott


www.scottbolster.comexternal link
facebookexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
98kellrs
Senior Member
98kellrs's Avatar
Joined Oct 2012
Perth, Australia
Post has been edited 11 months ago by 98kellrs.
Nov 10, 2016 18:07 |  #7

Have you read any of the other threads on the topic?

ART lenses are synonymous with insane image quality but occasional (and widely documented) AF issues. If you need to nail the shot 100% of the time you're probably better off with the Canon, but if you want razor sharp images and the ability to see how clean a subject's skin pores are, then go for the sigma.


Ryan
Nikon D800
Fujifilm X-T1
RSK Photography Facebook - Automotive Photography page (external link)
Website (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
47,623 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Joined Apr 2003
Rhode Island USA
Nov 10, 2016 18:41 |  #8

98kellrs wrote in post #18181198 (external link)
....If you need to nail the shot 100% of the time you're probably better off with the Canon, ....

except that this specific Canon lens is known to be one of the most difficult to get perfect focus, and it's slow.


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
MrAnderson
Member
Joined Dec 2016
Jan 09, 2017 21:23 |  #9

I love my 50L and won't be giving it up anytime soon. I shoot mostly at 1.2 on a 6D and the low light ability is insane. With that said, I have never used the sigma.




LOG IN TO REPLY
panicatnabisco
Senior Member
panicatnabisco's Avatar
Joined Apr 2012
san francisco, CA
Jan 10, 2017 22:15 |  #10

delmama wrote in post #18181145 (external link)
how would you describe that "unique look" of the canon 1.2?

There's an entire subforum dedicated to photo samples. It's easier seeing than describing it.


Canon 1DX | 6D | 16-35/2.8II | 24/1.4II | 24-70/2.8II | 24-105 | 50/1.8 | 50/1.2 | 70-200/2.8 IS II | 85/1.2II | 100/2.8 IS macro | 400/2.8 IS | 2xIII
Leica M8.2 | Noctilux 50 f/1 | Elmarit 90/2.8 Cinema BMD Ursa Mini 4k
afimages.net (external link) | Facebook (external link) | flickr (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Silver-Halide
Senior Member
Joined Jan 2015
Post has been edited 9 months ago by Silver-Halide.
Jan 13, 2017 23:49 |  #11

Sigma seems to render more detail, but I trust the build quality of the Canon more.

Here's both shot at f/1.4 (lowest common aperture) on my 5dIII.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Echoes in Eternity LLC | Tucson and Southern Arizona Wedding Photographer (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Silver-Halide
Senior Member
Joined Jan 2015
Jan 13, 2017 23:50 |  #12

zoomed

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Echoes in Eternity LLC | Tucson and Southern Arizona Wedding Photographer (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Allan.L
Goldmember
Allan.L's Avatar
1,066 posts
Joined Jul 2010
Ontario, Canada
Jan 30, 2017 12:51 |  #13

IMO it looks like there is a bit of motion blur (camera movement) in the second shot.


.

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

2,180 views & 1 like for this thread
50 sigma art vs. canon 50 1.2
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.0031 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.04s
Latest registered member is KOTV
919 guests, 442 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016