Sigma Announces 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM

farrukh wrote in post #5552178
Not in the corners. even at f8, the 30mm 1.4 sucks in the corners. Hope fully this new lens will be same sharp across the frame.

I've never taken a shot at f/1.4 in which I wanted the corners to be sharp. Personally, brick walls are not my favorite subject.

angryhampster wrote in post #5552829
I've never taken a shot at f/1.4 in which I wanted the corners to be sharp. Personally, brick walls are not my favorite subject.

What about group shots? I had this lens and I was unable to get people sharp in corners even at f8. so Its a proven click>> fact that this lens is soft in the corners at any aperture hence I wish 50 1.4 to be much much better then crappy 30.

XPHALCON wrote in post #5551527
I
And what is all this talk about minimum aperture? It's a f1.4, that's what all the hype is about! I couldn't care if it went to f128. I have one lens at f4 (25-105), and all the rest are 2.8 and larger. I usually shoot wide open, thats the whole reason for spending a grand on a piece of glass.

To be fair, everyone has their own needs.

But I would not be quick to jump on this lens. I will deal w/ sending it back to sigma for a good copy if that good copy is sharper than the canon, and faster, and more accurate. but until then, $500 is a lot to say "i'll get it when it's released"

randomlinh wrote in post #5553326
To be fair, everyone has their own needs.

But I would not be quick to jump on this lens. I will deal w/ sending it back to sigma for a good copy if that good copy is sharper than the canon, and faster, and more accurate. but until then, $500 is a lot to say "i'll get it when it's released"

You're absolutely right. Waiting a few months after release is very practical, the price should come down and more user reviews will be available.

farrukh wrote in post #5552178
Not in the corners. even at f8, the 30mm 1.4 sucks in the corners

farrukh wrote in post #5552984
I had this lens and I was unable to get people sharp in corners even at f8. so Its a proven click>> fact that this lens is soft in the corners at any aperture hence I wish 50 1.4 to be much much better then crappy 30.

PZ isn't "proven fact". They sample, what, one copy of the 30EX? Gee, 4 copies of the Brick for them to get a "good" (read: not great) sample.

F8 borders looks perfectly fine by me (35L shown also): http://www.pbase.com …s/image/7101668​4/original

You need to get yours serviced, I guess.

I've heard someone say (from POTN I think) that they buy three copies of whatever they want, keep they best and return the rest. Is there anyone here doing that? If so, what kind of issues do you run in to when using this method and who are you buying from (since you already have them broke in)? What do you tell them on returning the other two products?

I'd like to give this idea a shot, especially with third party products since I think that's a way to get a true sense of the product potential and keep the best copy. All the weeks or months of reviewing something to find the best thing and then you may end up settling for a copy that's not so hot? The multiple copy thing has some appeal to me. I'd consider selling the other two copies as "mint" on Ebay etc. too if the "returns" idea was problematic. So... anyone out there doing the buy 3, return 2 method that would be willing to pass on your experiences?

Buying something with the intent of returning it is morally questionable, at best. It hurts the retailer's stock level and may put them out-of-stock prematurely, limiting someone else's chance at buying a lens they intend to keep. I think the better way to do this would be to establish a relationship with a local vendor who will work with you on price and doesn't mind if you check a few in store or return one for another.

LightRules wrote in post #5553722
F8 borders looks perfectly fine by me ...

I had zero complaints about mine: centre or corners and that is from 1.4, whioch was perfectly usable, and up.

tkoutdoor wrote in post #5554466
I've heard someone say (from POTN I think) that they buy three copies of whatever they want, keep they best and return the rest. Is there anyone here doing that?

No, because I think it's wrong.

TheHoff wrote in post #5554499
Buying something with the intent of returning it is morally questionable, at best. It hurts the retailer's stock level and may put them out-of-stock prematurely, limiting someone else's chance at buying a lens they intend to keep. I think the better way to do this would be to establish a relationship with a local vendor who will work with you on price and doesn't mind if you check a few in store or return one for another.

Many places have a 10% or so return fee. The business should have some policy to handle their own concerns. It doesn't seem any different in the end if you do the same thing locally or remotely, you are accomplishing the same thing either way. If I do it locally I'm guaranteed to pay a much higher price due to not having any "New York" stores in my back yard. That is a thought though as to how one could go about it. Have you done this at your local store and how did it work out for you? What issues did you have to overcome if any to get the best of 3 product?

The most I've done is purchased a copy of a lens, tested it, thought it was bad, bought a 2nd while keeping the first for comparison, seeing that they were the same or so close as to not be an issue, and returned the 2nd one keeping the one I bought first.

Only ever did that once and the store knew what I was doing and why & explicitly stated they were fine with it.

condyk wrote in post #5554504
I had zero complaints about mine: centre or corners and that is from 1.4, whioch was perfectly usable, and up.

No, because I think it's wrong.

We all have an interest in getting the best copy of something we can so set aside your moral dilemma at the moment, because I think it could hinder what is a reasonable idea (wanting to get good glass). If morality were your sole issue, you would be a good candidate for buying three from anyone and selling the other two rather than returning them. There is probably a way to do this that suits anyones interests including moral interests and that's what I'm looking for. This to me is especially pertinent with Sigma. Tamron is a close second. I think it's morally wrong to be handed a piece of junk and be expected to return it twice in the hopes that it's status may be improved, but if there's another way to go about it where I get to the quality copy sooner then I'd be a little more inclined to buy that third party product. So in the end I may either "not buy 3rd party" or "buy 3rd party if I can get a good copy". I think they're better off with sales than without so that should have some moral weight to it as well. Think of the dealer making 3 sales instead of one and building the second hand market as well. I think one can make this into a negative moral issue, but it is not inherently a negative thing. It has to be construed that way IMO.

This is related to this Sigma lens in this thread because I think it's the one thing that may make me "jump in" when buying it, instead of setting on the sidelines waiting for God knows what to convince me to take a chance on them. I've already had my own bad Sigma experience so it's not a hypothetical.

I read over B&H and Adorama's policy pages and both have explicit return instructions that if followed, do not result in any return or restocking fee. If you want to suck it up and pay the 10-15% fee to a place that does, twice, then I suppose that is why they build in the charge.

Buying more than one and selling the others as used seems a good way... but you're still losing money. I'd rather deal with a local store who is fine with a few try-outs in store or will do an immediate hassle-free exchange.

tkoutdoor wrote in post #5554603
I think one can make this into a negative moral issue, but it is not inherently a negative thing. It has to be construed that way IMO.

I live by the law of karma so I try to make my choices based on what I feel is right in the bigger picture rather than my own selfish self interest and you can do as you feel is right. No big deal.

TheHoff wrote in post #5554610
I read over B&H and Adorama's policy pages and both have explicit return instructions that if followed, do not result in any return or restocking fee. If you want to suck it up and pay the 10-15% fee to a place that does, twice, then I suppose that is why they build in the charge.

Buying more than one and selling the others as used seems a good way... but you're still losing money. I'd rather deal with a local store who is fine with a few try-outs in store or will do an immediate hassle-free exchange.

Yeah, I've considered that. You're theoretically gonna pay the extra either way, but you're definitely gonna pay it if you don't have a New York store in your back yard. Might even take a loss on Ebay/Craigslist, but on the other hand you might not if you bought at a New York store at a good price. I'd just hate to have the local store give you trouble part way through the process and get stuck with high prices and selling the gear, but all things to be considered. That's for sure. Have you actually done something like this before and how did it work out if so?

condyk wrote in post #5554669
I live by the law of karma so I try to make my choices based on what I feel is right in the bigger picture rather than my own selfish self interest and you can do as you feel is right. No big deal.

Me too, hence the discussion. I can see good in the company I buy from making 3 sales instead of one and bolstering the 2nd hand market with the other two copies. It all depends on your perspective I guess.