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

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 28 Jun 2011 (Tuesday) 19:47
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon 50 1.2L vs Sigma 50 1.4

 
TeeBoi
Member
149 posts
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Mlilani, Hawaii
     
Jun 29, 2011 22:07 |  #76

To touch on the subject again, if it's an option, try them both out first and get the one that suits you best. Weigh cost vs performance, and see if the $1000 premium is worth it for you. If you are going to base your choice strictly on image quality, I'm almost certain you will not see a $1000 difference.

mike cabilangan wrote in post #12679317 (external link)
the overwhelming response is greatly appreciated.

follow up questions:

1) a youtube review of the 50L mentions that after some year, there's no more of this "focus shift", true?

*Focus shift is a design flaw, so the fact about 50L's made after a certain year is false. QC may have improved but the focus shift will always be there due to the design.

2) if the 50L is the only lens i bring, i'm naturally gonna be forced to shoot stopped down sometime, are the posts here saying that the 50L is not as sharp as the sigma at f/4 or f/5.6 as the sigma or other canon 50's? or that the 50L is "meant" to be used wide open? in contrast, is the sigma useable all across it's aperture range?

*I have no personal experience with the Sigma 50 so I can't comment on that, but stopped down I get great results from my 50L. There is more to sharpness than just the lens. If you have perfect lighting you can get sharp results from any of the 50mm options.

The statement; "The 50L is meant to be used wide open," to me means most people pay the premium to be able to shoot at 1.2, not necessarily that it needs to be used strictly at 1.2. To be honest, if there is enough ambient light I rarely shoot wide open unless it's the look I'm trying to achieve. But... when you need 1.2 you need 1.2, and having that option is priceless. Does the 1/3 stop justify the $1000 premium? For me no, but that premium does give you partial weather sealing, great build quality, great optics, and the red ring "prestige." I say great instead of better because I haven't physically held or used the Sigmalux.

3) i've tried the sigma in the store, but haven't tried the 50L yet. although i could, i doubt a day's playing with the lens will push me either way.


*When I downloaded my first photos taken with the 50L I didn't regret not choosing the cheaper alternative, Sigma.

-tyler


5DII
17-40L | 24-70L | 70-200 2.8L IS
24L II | 50L | 85L II
580EX II | Kenko Extension Tubes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
sol95
Senior Member
661 posts
Joined Jul 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Jun 29, 2011 22:46 |  #77

kin2son wrote in post #12676153 (external link)
well if you have to choose between 35/50/85L and ignore the fl difference, how would you rank them in order?

I personally will definitely rank the 50L last, but again, thats just my opinion.

Again, on what basis do you rank the 50L last? I asked if your opinion was based on actual experience with the said lens/lenses, or is it 2nd-hand "knowledge" gleaned from forums?

Personally, I've used all 3 L primes. And as you can see by what I've got now, I rated the 35L last after the 85LII and the 50L.

Of course, this is MY personal preference. But at least it's based on experience with the actual lenses.

It always surprises me when people are quick to make broad, sweeping remarks about a lens when they haven't actually used it. Of course, you're entitled to your opinion. But equally, given a lack of experience with the lens, I'm entitled to pooh-pooh that opinion. ;)


Bodies: 5D mk III
Lenses: 50 f/1.2L | 85 f/1.2L II | 100 f/2.8L IS Macro | 17-40 f/4.0L | 24-70 f/2.8L II | 70-200 f/2.8L IS II
Accessories: 430EX II | TC-80N3 M43: Olympus E-PM1 | Olympus m.Zuiko 14-42 II R | Panasonic 14 f/2.5 | Panasonic 20 f/1.8 | Olympus m.Zuiko 45 f/1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sol95
Senior Member
661 posts
Joined Jul 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Jun 29, 2011 22:48 |  #78

To the OP:

If you can afford to do so, get the 50L. Chances are that if you get the sigma, you'll continually second-guess what it would be like with the 50L, even if you're happy with the sigma. :)


Bodies: 5D mk III
Lenses: 50 f/1.2L | 85 f/1.2L II | 100 f/2.8L IS Macro | 17-40 f/4.0L | 24-70 f/2.8L II | 70-200 f/2.8L IS II
Accessories: 430EX II | TC-80N3 M43: Olympus E-PM1 | Olympus m.Zuiko 14-42 II R | Panasonic 14 f/2.5 | Panasonic 20 f/1.8 | Olympus m.Zuiko 45 f/1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pieq314
Goldmember
1,101 posts
Joined Apr 2006
     
Jun 30, 2011 07:18 |  #79

jwcdds wrote in post #12677407 (external link)
Which is why when I posted, it was directed at your first response above, citing that you "do not think the Canon 50mm (1.2 or 1.4) can be described as sharp at f/1.4."

Thus I was/am curious as to whether it's first hand experience from you or if it's eyeball testing looking at the thread archive.

I once had Canon 50/1.4 (before 50/1.2's time), and not happy with its sharpness, contrast, focusing speed and accuracy. So I started looking at sample photos on the Internet, upsizing, downsizing, rightsizing, MTF, etc, and settled on Sigma 50/1.4, and it performed as I expected (in other words, my conclusion from upsizing, downsizing, rightsizing, etc turned out to be valid).


Canon 1D Mk III/5D2, Sigma 50mm f/1.4, Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX, Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS, Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, Sigma 17-35mm f/2.8-4 EX, Canon 85/1.8, Canon 100/2.8 IS macro, Canon 135/2, Sigma 150-500 OS, Canon 500 f/4 IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MatthewK
Goldmember
4,997 posts
Gallery: 1022 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 15878
Joined Apr 2009
Location: Maryland
     
Jun 30, 2011 07:59 |  #80

At one point, the Sigma 50 f/1.4 was the only lens I had (used with 5D2). Great lens, tons of images were made in that 7-8 month stretch, made me really work with the 50mm focal length, as well as the characteristics of the lens. The one thing I noticed was that the AF of the Sigma seems to hunt a lot in low light, and sometimes even in light where you'd expect it to lock on, it sort of "judders" back and forth, before locking on.

The 50L: solid AF performance. Locks on like a vice grips. Focus shift: again, it's a known characteristic of the design, you'll learn to work with it, so it becomes a non-issue.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jwcdds
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,926 posts
Gallery: 1738 photos
Best ofs: 5
Likes: 5629
Joined Aug 2004
Location: Santa Monica, CA
     
Jun 30, 2011 09:24 |  #81

pieq314 wrote in post #12681899 (external link)
I once had Canon 50/1.4 (before 50/1.2's time), and not happy with its sharpness, contrast, focusing speed and accuracy. So I started looking at sample photos on the Internet, upsizing, downsizing, rightsizing, MTF, etc, and settled on Sigma 50/1.4, and it performed as I expected (in other words, my conclusion from upsizing, downsizing, rightsizing, etc turned out to be valid).

Perfect. Then that would make your initial comment about sharpness of the Canon 50/1.4 not being sharp at 1.4 valid. But that doesn't automatically extend to the 50L.

As I noted in my first examples, I also had the canon 50/1.4 first. It was a lousy performer until stopped down and even then, AF was unreliable. It may have had a front focus issue that my 40D just can't correct. I was so disenchanted with the lens that I sold it and completely skipped the 50mm FL for almost 3 years.

I had considered going the Sigma route, except I wasn't keen on possibly putting up with exchanging for multiple, multiple copies, OR sending it to Sigma which some had reported could take a few weeks to fix any issues/problems. And then there's the mixed report about low-light shooting. I prefer to shoot w/ just ambient indoor lighting, so that was another issue that I wanted to avoid as that is one that Sigma can't fix.

For those willing to go that route when necessary, they are rewarded with a great performing lens. I wanted to minimize the chance to encounter that kind of frustration.

The one thing that sets the 50L apart from all the other lenses I've tried is... it's got that "dream-like" look to the photos. It's hard to describe. I don't see it on any of my other lenses. And I don't see it on any of the other lenses in the POTN archive either.

The 50L was my most reluctant purchase because the gearhead in me knows of the focus shift issue and my previous experience w/ the 50/1.4. But the 50L is something else altogether. It's currently my outdoor walk-along lens of choice.


Julian
Gear/Feedbacks | SmugMug (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Blog (external link) | Instagram (external link) | YouTube (external link)
My Reviews | "The Mighty One" (external link) | "EF 85mm f/1.4 L IS Review" (external link)
Founding member and President of the BOGUS Photo Club (Blatantly-Over-Geared & Under-Skilled)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AhXiong
Senior Member
Avatar
638 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Malaysia
     
Jun 30, 2011 09:33 as a reply to  @ MatthewK's post |  #82

Anyone saying Sigma 50mm f1.4? :)

IMAGE: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2161/5768423335_73ba4410c4_b.jpg


My blog... http://ahxiongxiong.bl​ogspot.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mike ­ cabilangan
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,378 posts
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Metro Manila
     
Jun 30, 2011 22:09 |  #83

during the course of this thread, i've changed my mind so many times, my head is spinning :D

-during the early part of the thread...i was going for the sigma
-then i read about "regretting it in the end"...i was going for the 50L
-then i thought about getting the sigma WHILE i saved for the 50L then selling the sigma.
-then i read about the sigma having a hard time locking focus in dark scenarios? (kinda what i'm going to use this for) ... now i'm back to 50L.

in conclusion, i will save up for the 50L and 24-105L (i don't have a reliable mid focal length lens both zoom and prime when i swapped my 17-50 2.8 VC)


camera bag reviews (external link)
flickr (external link)gearLust

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
silverpilot03
Member
123 posts
Joined Jan 2009
     
Jun 30, 2011 22:46 |  #84

mike cabilangan wrote in post #12686282 (external link)
during the course of this thread, i've changed my mind so many times, my head is spinning :D

-during the early part of the thread...i was going for the sigma
-then i read about "regretting it in the end"...i was going for the 50L
-then i thought about getting the sigma WHILE i saved for the 50L then selling the sigma.
-then i read about the sigma having a hard time locking focus in dark scenarios? (kinda what i'm going to use this for) ... now i'm back to 50L.

in conclusion, i will save up for the 50L and 24-105L (i don't have a reliable mid focal length lens both zoom and prime when i swapped my 17-50 2.8 VC)

Sir, I'll trade my slightly used 50L and 24-105L for that slightly used 200 f/2L of yours :D :lol:


way too much Canon stuff for an amateur

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mike ­ cabilangan
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,378 posts
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Metro Manila
     
Jun 30, 2011 23:54 |  #85

silverpilot03 wrote in post #12686456 (external link)
Sir, I'll trade my slightly used 50L and 24-105L for that slightly used 200 f/2L of yours :D :lol:

let me think about that :p


camera bag reviews (external link)
flickr (external link)gearLust

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lightworks ­ Imaging
Goldmember
1,525 posts
Joined Jul 2008
Location: West Allis, WI USA
     
Jul 01, 2011 00:51 |  #86

chrisandaivi wrote in post #12675784 (external link)
Usually third party lenses have quality issues.

I wonder if the guys at Zeiss know about this...

:)


Just the humble musings of a beginner...
Eric
Lightworks Imaging (external link)
MM (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
zarray
Member
167 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Singapore/ London
     
Jul 01, 2011 08:26 as a reply to  @ post 12679804 |  #87

Both lenses are excellent. However I'd think you'll be hard-pressed to find someone with a great copy of the sigma wanting to make the switch to the 50L.

I had my heart set on the 50L initially but decided to get the sigma 50mm to tide me over for the time being. After shooting with the sigma..i doubt I'll be getting the 50L because FWIW the sigma is fabulous. I bought mine from a local store and it was the first copy i tried and i bought it immediately. It had no focusing issues and the central sharpness was very good.


5D Mark II | 5Dc |17-40 | 24-105 | 70-200 F2.8 IS | Sigma 50mm 1.4 | 580EX

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pieq314
Goldmember
1,101 posts
Joined Apr 2006
     
Jul 01, 2011 18:45 |  #88

jwcdds wrote in post #12682463 (external link)
Perfect. Then that would make your initial comment about sharpness of the Canon 50/1.4 not being sharp at 1.4 valid. But that doesn't automatically extend to the 50L.

As I noted in my first examples, I also had the canon 50/1.4 first. It was a lousy performer until stopped down and even then, AF was unreliable. It may have had a front focus issue that my 40D just can't correct. I was so disenchanted with the lens that I sold it and completely skipped the 50mm FL for almost 3 years.

I had considered going the Sigma route, except I wasn't keen on possibly putting up with exchanging for multiple, multiple copies, OR sending it to Sigma which some had reported could take a few weeks to fix any issues/problems. And then there's the mixed report about low-light shooting. I prefer to shoot w/ just ambient indoor lighting, so that was another issue that I wanted to avoid as that is one that Sigma can't fix.

For those willing to go that route when necessary, they are rewarded with a great performing lens. I wanted to minimize the chance to encounter that kind of frustration.

The one thing that sets the 50L apart from all the other lenses I've tried is... it's got that "dream-like" look to the photos. It's hard to describe. I don't see it on any of my other lenses. And I don't see it on any of the other lenses in the POTN archive either.

The 50L was my most reluctant purchase because the gearhead in me knows of the focus shift issue and my previous experience w/ the 50/1.4. But the 50L is something else altogether. It's currently my outdoor walk-along lens of choice.

You seem to complain that I analyzed other's sample photos and made my results public. True, I never had 50/1.2, and did not have Canon 50/1.4 and Sigma 50/1.4 at the same time. But my analysis for Sigma 50/1.4 (before I decided to get this lens) turned out to be just as expected when I finally got Sigma 50/1.4.

OK, if you do not believe my conclusion that Sigma 50/1.4 is sharper than Canon 50/1.2, take a look at photozone.de's tests on these two lenses. Now I am quite sure they did it under controlled conditions. According to photozone, Sigma 50/1.4 is better in resolution, vignetting, chromatic aberration.


Canon 1D Mk III/5D2, Sigma 50mm f/1.4, Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX, Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS, Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, Sigma 17-35mm f/2.8-4 EX, Canon 85/1.8, Canon 100/2.8 IS macro, Canon 135/2, Sigma 150-500 OS, Canon 500 f/4 IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
K6AZ
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,250 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 9
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Richmond VA USA
     
Jul 01, 2011 18:50 |  #89

pieq314 wrote in post #12690709 (external link)
You seem to complain that I analyzed other's sample photos and made my results public. True, I never had 50/1.2, and did not have Canon 50/1.4 and Sigma 50/1.4 at the same time. But my analysis for Sigma 50/1.4 (before I decided to get this lens) turned out to be just as expected when I finally got Sigma 50/1.4.

OK, if you do not believe my conclusion that Sigma 50/1.4 is sharper than Canon 50/1.2, take a look at photozone.de's tests on these two lenses. Now I am quite sure they did it under controlled conditions. According to photozone, Sigma 50/1.4 is better in resolution, vignetting, chromatic aberration.

You don't buy a fast prime for sharpness, if you're looking for sharp images any number of zooms will yield perfectly acceptable results. The reason people buy the 50L is the same reason they buy the 85L, 135L, and the 200L and that is for the bokeh which the Sigma doesn't come close to.


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pieq314
Goldmember
1,101 posts
Joined Apr 2006
     
Jul 01, 2011 18:52 |  #90

zarray wrote in post #12687732 (external link)
Both lenses are excellent. However I'd think you'll be hard-pressed to find someone with a great copy of the sigma wanting to make the switch to the 50L.

I had my heart set on the 50L initially but decided to get the sigma 50mm to tide me over for the time being. After shooting with the sigma..i doubt I'll be getting the 50L because FWIW the sigma is fabulous. I bought mine from a local store and it was the first copy i tried and i bought it immediately. It had no focusing issues and the central sharpness was very good.

I want to share my experience with a "bad" Sigma lens. I have the Sigma 30/1.4, and it initially front focused. When I realized the problem, I just sent it back to Sigma to be fixed. After that, it has been a sharp lens.


Canon 1D Mk III/5D2, Sigma 50mm f/1.4, Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX, Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS, Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, Sigma 17-35mm f/2.8-4 EX, Canon 85/1.8, Canon 100/2.8 IS macro, Canon 135/2, Sigma 150-500 OS, Canon 500 f/4 IS

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

42,468 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon 50 1.2L vs Sigma 50 1.4
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Paul Gnandt
899 guests, 268 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.