Canon 50mm 1.4 vs Sigma 50mm 1.4

Congrats, and I'm jealous. haha
Plus, I also like your subtle sig change from '50mm 1.4' to 'Sigma 50mm 1.4' haha

I plan to get this lens but not anytime soon.
Hopefully by the end of this year, when my skills have gotten better and I could convince myself more effectively that I NEED this lens opposed to just wanting it right now

I have had a 50mm almost from the time I started with DSLR's. It is a very useful size for many of the things I do. Just tonight I was photographing a karate promotion event. Since I gave my 50mm away to a friend leaving the country, I didn't have one. With my 28mm I had to get so close to the action that I was actually in the way. My 50 would have put me back out of the way and still been close enough to get the shots. So I had to replace my 50, and I think this lens will fit the bill, and, if the IQ is what everyone says, it should make a great lens.

I am also wanting the canon 85 1.8 if it ever gets in-stock again. That one will be perfect for indoor sports like basketball games.

I think both of these 2 lenses will fit nicely at weddings (if I can ever book one).

...............WAITING FOR MY LENS TO COME...............

Poped in to my local camera store. The said they test every Sigma 50mm that comes in before they put it on to the shelf, just to make sure its focusing ok......they didnt have any in stock

weka2000 wrote in post #7667638
Poped in to my local camera store. The said they test every Sigma 50mm that comes in before they put it on to the shelf, just to make sure its focusing ok......they didnt have any in stock

I can draw two conclusions from this:

1. They all had a focus issue and are on their way back to Sigma.
2. It is one hell of a lens and are just hopping off the shelves.

I just got one and used it last night. Focus was bang on, image quality was superb, bokeh to die for.

Hogloff wrote in post #7668186
I can draw two conclusions from this:

1. They all had a focus issue and are on their way back to Sigma.
2. It is one hell of a lens and are just hopping off the shelves.

I just got one and used it last night. Focus was bang on, image quality was superb, bokeh to die for.

probably a combination of both, as everyone is OOS it seems. but given sigma's track record, I'm sure a few were kept off the shelf making them sell a little faster

For them its all about happy customers. Better they find a issue before its put on the shelf.

Well the Sigma 50 is starting to piss me off. I figured AF micro could compensate for the inconsistent focusing, but sadly to no avail. What my copy does is alternate between two or three points on the distance scale, a fraction of a mm apart, making AF microadjustments next to useless. Every time I hit the AF, it decides on one of the three points, so sometimes it might seem sharp but then a second or two later it will go out of whack. Anyone else's do this? Occurs on both of my bodies. I've sent it back twice, but I don't think they really do anything with it.

ef2 wrote in post #7670891
Well the Sigma 50 is starting to piss me off. I figured AF micro could compensate for the inconsistent focusing, but sadly to no avail. What my copy does is alternate between two or three points on the distance scale, a fraction of a mm apart, making AF microadjustments next to useless. Every time I hit the AF, it decides on one of the three points, so sometimes it might seem sharp but then a second or two later it will go out of whack. Anyone else's do this? Occurs on both of my bodies. I've sent it back twice, but I don't think they really do anything with it.

My experience exactly. Very frustrating. I wanted to like this lens so much, but the crazy inconsistency was too much. Ended up returning ... lets just say several... to Amazon and one to B&H.

Serial numbers available upon request !! $2 each.

ef2 wrote in post #7670891
Well the Sigma 50 is starting to piss me off. I figured AF micro could compensate for the inconsistent focusing, but sadly to no avail. What my copy does is alternate between two or three points on the distance scale, a fraction of a mm apart, making AF microadjustments next to useless. Every time I hit the AF, it decides on one of the three points, so sometimes it might seem sharp but then a second or two later it will go out of whack. Anyone else's do this? Occurs on both of my bodies. I've sent it back twice, but I don't think they really do anything with it.

No mines on target, sounds strange, happens at all apertures? Maybe call them, tell them sending it back hasn't helped, see if you can just get a new one.

ef2 wrote in post #7670891
Well the Sigma 50 is starting to piss me off. I figured AF micro could compensate for the inconsistent focusing, but sadly to no avail. What my copy does is alternate between two or three points on the distance scale, a fraction of a mm apart, making AF microadjustments next to useless. Every time I hit the AF, it decides on one of the three points, so sometimes it might seem sharp but then a second or two later it will go out of whack. Anyone else's do this? Occurs on both of my bodies. I've sent it back twice, but I don't think they really do anything with it.

Mine did that too. It was pretty schizophrenic and would often readjust focus slightly after initially acquiring it.

Mine also focus shifted. Front focused at close distances, backfocused at far distances. Not that my 50L doesn't focus shift either though (but I'm much happier with it, it doesn't affect real world shooting, I only notice it when shooting charts and boxes, which is not often).

Perry Ge wrote in post #7671348
Mine did that too. It was pretty schizophrenic and would often readjust focus slightly after initially acquiring it.

Mine also focus shifted. Front focused at close distances, backfocused at far distances. Not that my 50L doesn't focus shift either though (but I'm much happier with it, it doesn't affect real world shooting, I only notice it when shooting charts and boxes, which is not often).

Why do we say that about the 50L, to me, that's just part of the story Perry. Perhaps it doesn't bother you because you're shooting stopped down and that's fantastic that it suits your style so well, you do great work.....But many of us tried to use the 50L in "real world" shooting which for me (us) is usually f1.2-f2.8 with a high aperture 50mm....I shoot a lot of still life but in the 3' to 7' range. So the 50L is just out of question... (BTW, charts are the last thing I shoot when I notice a problem...hate shooting charts ) Anyways....That's why I find the EX such a breath of fresh air....Doesn't matter what aperture I shoot at, from any distance, it just works...very nice.

I realize there are a lot of copies of the EX that act like yours did....and that's frustrating to me....I want to recommend it to everyone, ( I did when I first got it, but stopped after you had your problems), explaining that you might just have to send it in to be fixed, once, twice, even 3 times, or send it in for a new one is stupid.....

The 50L is not the answer for everyone, just some, and that is lame....

I'm off to shoot some cherry blossoms, cheers

Edit: In the end, I'm glad you found the 50L to your liking and that it suits your style and even happier that I found the Sigma to suit mine, I know both of us have been searching for a 50mm for quite a while.

thatkatmat wrote in post #7671507
Why do we say that about the 50L, to me, that's just part of the story Perry. Perhaps it doesn't bother you because you're shooting stopped down and that's fantastic that it suits your style so well, you do great work.....But many of us tried to use the 50L in "real world" shooting which for me (us) is usually f1.2-f2.8 with a high aperture 50mm....I shoot a lot of still life but in the 3' to 7' range. So the 50L is just out of question... (BTW, charts are the last thing I shoot when I notice a problem...hate shooting charts ) Anyways....That's why I find the EX such a breath of fresh air....Doesn't matter what aperture I shoot at, from any distance, it just works...very nice.

I realize there are a lot of copies of the EX that act like yours did....and that's frustrating to me....I want to recommend it to everyone, ( I did when I first got it, but stopped after you had your problems), explaining that you might just have to send it in to be fixed, once, twice, even 3 times, or send it in for a new one is stupid.....

The 50L is not the answer for everyone, just some, and that is lame....

I'm off to shoot some cherry blossoms, cheers

I agree with you man. It sucks about the 50L. But it also sucks about the Sigma - that lens has so much potential to be great.

I don't always shoot stopped down at f/8 ish. 2 nights ago I was shooting wide open with the 50L and it was fannnnntastic.

The 50L suits me, but the Sigma 50 1.4 is a terrific lens too. Sadly, I can't recommend either of them without many qualifications and reservations, unlike say...the 85L which I can recommend wholeheartedly.

Edit: In the end, I'm also happy we both found our perfect 50s. I just think it's funny that I ended up with your 3rd copy of the 50L, which was your "good" copy - and you're probably way pickier than I am about gear, so that gave me confidence in this lens.

Im in the same boat.
Really trying hard to like teh Sigma, but looking on Flickr and asking about most peole say the Canon. So why in here are alot of people favouring the Sigma ??

Anyone got any experience of both of them on a 5D2 ??

CanonDad wrote in post #7672025
Im in the same boat.
Really trying hard to like teh Sigma, but looking on Flickr and asking about most peole say the Canon. So why in here are alot of people favouring the Sigma ??

Anyone got any experience of both of them on a 5D2 ??

I think people like the sigma because they are cheaper, and can still provide a decent shot

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

I like it better because it doesn't have any focus shift and is sharp and contrasty and just better all around for me.