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 02 Jun 2013 (Sunday) 03:02
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

sigma 50 1.4 v Canon 50 .4. Your thoughts please?

 
L.J.G.
"Not brigth enough"
Avatar
10,463 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 42
Joined Jul 2010
Location: ɹǝpun uʍop
     
Jun 02, 2013 17:01 |  #16

Yep, another vote for the Sigma. Worth any focus issues once you get a sorted one.


Lloyd
Never make the same mistake twice, there are so many new ones, try a different one each day
Gear Flick (external link)r

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Thorrulz
Goldmember
Avatar
3,778 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 392
Joined Jan 2009
Location: The Land of the "Go Big Red!"
     
Jun 02, 2013 17:47 |  #17

philodelphi wrote in post #15991519 (external link)
Here's an image I took recently with the Sigma 50mm, at 1.4, on the 5D II:
IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: NOT FOUND

The Canon could NEVER do this, believe me, I tried. A lot.

I don't know why any of Canons lens couldn't duplicate that shot. I just shot some pics at f/1.4 with mine and they all came out as expected.


Flickr (external link)
D800 I Nikon 200 f2 VR 1 I Nikon 200 f2 ED AI-S I Nikon 135 f2 DC I Nikon 28-70 f/2.8 I Nikon 50 f/1.4G I Nikon 85 f/1.8G I Pentax 645D I SMC FA 645 75 F2.8 I SMC FA 645 45-85 F4.5 I SMC FA 645 200 F4
My sister, the professional baker and cake decorator once told me that my camera takes great pics. My reply was that I thought her oven baked great cakes.:lol:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Jun 02, 2013 19:25 |  #18

Thorrulz wrote in post #15992710 (external link)
I don't know why any of Canons lens couldn't duplicate that shot. I just shot some pics at f/1.4 with mine and they all came out as expected.

Just looking at that shot, these are the obvious things my Canon 50/1.4 would have done different:
-horrible, distracting, nervous bokeh in the trees instead of lovely creamy bokeh
-even more CA


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,424 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 346
Joined Sep 2011
     
Jun 02, 2013 21:09 as a reply to  @ Sirrith's post |  #19

One thing obvious here is that no matter which fanboi group you are in, both of these lenses need an update. If kept to the $800-1,000 range, a 50/1.4 IS or a 50/1.4 Art would be generally well accepted in the photo world.

I recently upgraded my 50/1.8 to the C50/1.4 because I have a new born and needed a better 50 and couldnt wait for the 'next' lens to come out. Everything Sirrith has said is true about the C50 except for me, the AF has been spot on. Still it is shaper than my 50/1.8 at all apertures up to about 3.2 where they are even. Unlike my C50, my AF on the 50/1.8 was all over the map.

On the other side and though I have never used the S50, comments from Roger C from lens rentals on the AF performance of the S50 was enough to detour me.

My biggest hesitation on buying the C50/1.4 was knowing how prone to failure the AF motor is. I have done a lot of research on the topic though and it seems like two things speed up this failure. One is using FTM in general and the other is bumping the front element back in. I don't use FTM much anyhow and I always keep the hood on to prevent the second. I'll probably upgrade to the first offering in a 50/1.4 art or IS when released, but for now I have very happy with the improvement over my 50/1.8.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davidc502
Goldmember
Avatar
3,459 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 38
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Tennessee
     
Jun 02, 2013 21:20 |  #20

Sirrith wrote in post #15992998 (external link)
Just looking at that shot, these are the obvious things my Canon 50/1.4 would have done different:
-horrible, distracting, nervous bokeh in the trees instead of lovely creamy bokeh
-even more CA

You can't fix horrible.


_
My Gear is ---> Here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Thorrulz
Goldmember
Avatar
3,778 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 392
Joined Jan 2009
Location: The Land of the "Go Big Red!"
     
Jun 02, 2013 21:44 |  #21

Sirrith wrote in post #15992998 (external link)
Just looking at that shot, these are the obvious things my Canon 50/1.4 would have done different:
-horrible, distracting, nervous bokeh in the trees instead of lovely creamy bokeh
-even more CA

At least it would be in focus enough to tell what it was you were shooting.:lol: Common theme in this thread is "if"you get a properly focusing Sigma then it is a good lens. And that's even from the Pro-Sigma crowd. I will stand by what is happening on the new and used market with the Sigma 50 f/1.4. If it was such a fantastic lens you wouldn't see the price falling out so quickly. That's a pure fact.

Sirrith, you can quote me now.;)


Flickr (external link)
D800 I Nikon 200 f2 VR 1 I Nikon 200 f2 ED AI-S I Nikon 135 f2 DC I Nikon 28-70 f/2.8 I Nikon 50 f/1.4G I Nikon 85 f/1.8G I Pentax 645D I SMC FA 645 75 F2.8 I SMC FA 645 45-85 F4.5 I SMC FA 645 200 F4
My sister, the professional baker and cake decorator once told me that my camera takes great pics. My reply was that I thought her oven baked great cakes.:lol:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Thorrulz
Goldmember
Avatar
3,778 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 392
Joined Jan 2009
Location: The Land of the "Go Big Red!"
     
Jun 02, 2013 21:47 |  #22

Thorrulz wrote in post #15993409 (external link)
At least it would be in focus enough to tell what it was you were shooting.:lol: Common theme in this thread is "if"you get a properly focusing Sigma then it is a good lens. And that's even from the Pro-Sigma crowd. I will stand by what is happening on the new and used market with the Sigma 50 f/1.4. If it was such a fantastic lens you wouldn't see the price falling out so quickly. That's a pure fact.

Sirrith, you can quote me now.;)

BTW, here is a shot taken with the Canon 50 at f/1.4. The background doesn't look so horrible now does it.

IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7451/8931890200_faa8d27117_c.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/rickzphoto/8931​890200/  (external link)
IMG_5617 as Smart Object-1 (external link) by RickZPhoto (external link), on Flickr

Flickr (external link)
D800 I Nikon 200 f2 VR 1 I Nikon 200 f2 ED AI-S I Nikon 135 f2 DC I Nikon 28-70 f/2.8 I Nikon 50 f/1.4G I Nikon 85 f/1.8G I Pentax 645D I SMC FA 645 75 F2.8 I SMC FA 645 45-85 F4.5 I SMC FA 645 200 F4
My sister, the professional baker and cake decorator once told me that my camera takes great pics. My reply was that I thought her oven baked great cakes.:lol:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
philodelphi
Goldmember
Avatar
1,205 posts
Gallery: 48 photos
Likes: 612
Joined May 2008
Location: King of Prussia PA USA
     
Jun 02, 2013 21:49 |  #23

Perhaps I've just been lucky, but I've never had a Sigma lens not focus well. I bought my 50 1.4 on craigslist for 300. It did need the micro focus adjustment and its been utterly reliable since then.


Sony DSC-RX100M2 α7R III / ILCE-7RM3 Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 IV | Voigtlander 65mm F2 Macro APO-Lanthar | Venus Optics Laowa 15mm f/4 Macro | Sony FE 24-240mm F3.5-6.3 OSS Sonnar T* FE 55mm F1.8 ZA FE 24mm f/1.4 GM | Samyang 35mm f/1.4 ED AS UMC | Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro Photo EF 135mm f/2L USM EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM | Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM | Tokina Firin 20mm f/2 FE MF | Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 Di III RXD

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Broomer
Senior Member
Avatar
556 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 49
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Broome, Western Australia
     
Jun 02, 2013 21:55 |  #24

gasrocks wrote in post #15991362 (external link)
I only use MF so any issues with Af don't affect me. No brainer - Sigma 50/1.4. Sold my Canon the day I got the Sigma.

Can I ask how do you MF? live view x10 on some other way?


Paul

5DIII, 7DII, 40D, 16-35L f4, 17-55 f2.8, 24-105L, 85 1.8, 135 2.0L, 100-400L, 50 1.8 STM, 600ex-rt

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tmuussoni
Senior Member
330 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Oct 2011
Location: .FI
     
Jun 02, 2013 23:43 |  #25

Both Canon (50mm f/1.4 USM II ?) and Sigma (Art-series) should release their new 50mm lenses if you ask me. It's just that Canon should do it much faster (really old optical design). Well, in my opinion the Sigma is the better lens, if IQ is what matters the most. Bokeh, micro contrast, saturation, out of focus highlights, CA, all better. In short, things you appreciate the most on a 50mm standard lens. Sharpness is really a tie, you probably won't see a difference here. Getting the Sigma even at the risk of getting a badly focusing lens - then you simply exchange it to new since Sigma has better warranty anyway. And in this case, I am not sure if I'd say Canon focuses better, I did have plenty of erratic behavior with my Canon 50/1.4, until it broke one day (micro-USM is kinda terrible and ancient design anyway). Now I have the 50L and Sigma was quite close to 50L in IQ, while in same time the Canon 50mm f/1.4 is really much below to 50L...

If manual focusing is ok for you, then also take a look at these:
- Zeiss MP 50/2 (fantastic lens, really has that 3D-pop)
- slightly older design, Zeiss Contax 50mm f/1.7
- rokkor 58mm f/1.2


Flickr (external link)
Gear list

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rgiorgio
Hatchling
5 posts
Joined Jun 2013
     
Jun 03, 2013 00:01 |  #26

I am new here and just went through the same question. Purchased a new 6D, which 50ml to go with. After reading so much back and forth, decided on the Sigma. I am liking it more and more. It is turning into my favorite lens. Thought about the 50L. Just too much and read n too many laces picture quality is not really better. Happy with my Sigma 50. Actually so happy with it, just purchased Sigma 15ml fisheye. Canon's zoom L series fisheye just too much for how much it is going to be used.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Jun 03, 2013 00:10 |  #27

Thorrulz wrote in post #15993409 (external link)
At least it would be in focus enough to tell what it was you were shooting.:lol: Common theme in this thread is "if"you get a properly focusing Sigma then it is a good lens. And that's even from the Pro-Sigma crowd. I will stand by what is happening on the new and used market with the Sigma 50 f/1.4. If it was such a fantastic lens you wouldn't see the price falling out so quickly. That's a pure fact.

Sirrith, you can quote me now.;)

But my Canon 50 1.4 had inconsistent focus ;)

The Canon is dropping about $100-120 from new to used. The Sigma doesn't seem to be dropping much more than that, perhaps $150 ish? I haven't really looked at trends and such though, this is just my impression of the averages from a quick search of the sales archives. That is quite a small difference IMO.

On the other hand, if you look at the Canon 35L, used prices have plummeted since the start of the year. Does that mean it is a bad lens? Of course not.


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mornnb
Goldmember
1,646 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 23
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Sydney
     
Jun 03, 2013 03:59 |  #28

Taken with the Sigma 50mm on my 6D. Was doing some staring at goats at the Easter show. Note how smooth it keeps the blurred hay.

IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8398/8605195547_1b0a111fb4_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/mornnb/86051955​47/  (external link)
Royal Easter Show 2013_MG_1686 (external link) by mornnb (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8395/8606316888_b8acc84d87_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/mornnb/86063168​88/  (external link)
Royal Easter Show 2013_MG_1708 (external link) by mornnb (external link), on Flickr

Canon 5D Mark III - Leica M240
EF 16-35mm F/4 IS L - EF 14mm f/2.8 L II - - EF 17mm TS-E L - EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L II - EF 70-200mm IS II f/2.8 L - Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art - Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX
Voigtlander 15mm III - 28mm Elmarit-M ASPH - 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M FLE - 50mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH
500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jt354
Senior Member
401 posts
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Michigan
     
Jun 03, 2013 11:27 |  #29

The price on the Sigma is dropping (new) for two reasons: to match Canon's rebate on their 50mm and to compensate for the fact that $500 is a ridiculous price to pay for a third-party "nifty fifty", no matter how big and heavy it may be.


Zenfolio (external link)
flickr (external link)
Gear: Canon 60D / Canon G12 / Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 / Canon 35mm f/2 IS / Canon 85mm f/1.8 / Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 / Speedlite 430 EXII / Slik 700DX legs / Cullmann MB6 head

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tmuussoni
Senior Member
330 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Oct 2011
Location: .FI
     
Jun 03, 2013 13:06 |  #30

jt354 wrote in post #15995012 (external link)
The price on the Sigma is dropping (new) for two reasons: to match Canon's rebate on their 50mm and to compensate for the fact that $500 is a ridiculous price to pay for a third-party "nifty fifty", no matter how big and heavy it may be.

That's just ridiculous. If you are serious then it's even more ridiculous to pay $400 for a >42 year old design, since the Canon 50/1.4 is based on the 1971 FD design (7 elements in 6 groups).

People wouldn't buy it, if it wasn't a good product (Sigma 50/1.4).Or why do you think people are paying >$900 for a "third party" 35mm lens (Sigma 35/1.4), if it actually wasn't a d@mn good product?

And probably most of us agree here that the Sigma beats Canon in IQ...


Flickr (external link)
Gear list

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

7,897 views & 0 likes for this thread
sigma 50 1.4 v Canon 50 .4. Your thoughts please?
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 dsk26894
919 guests, 339 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.