Three "50 Primes" Tested

I have just posted this: http://www.pbase.com/f​stopjojo/50s

Something I found very interesting was while the Sigma EX "DG" is quite the performer vis-a-vis center and edge sharpness, the new "DG" coatings seem to have no effect on harsh conditions (see image at site). The "DG" coatings are supposed to tackle the precise harsh conditions I tested, but it did not please. The Canon 50 USM does much better in harsh contrast lighting. But overall, the Sigma is a heck of a performer, especially its edge performance.
I'm wondering now about all the "DG" hype...it "might" just be all that, hype. I would like to see more folks shoot in these harsh conditions with their respective "DG" lenses.

What size sensor did you test these on?

Thanks for the effort BTW - very good test.

Hi Tom, these are all on APS-C (20D), thanks.

good work, I think on this stage SIGMA won

Great job. Wonder how the sigma would fare on a ff camera.

Probably quite well. Macro lenses seem to be designed with a flat field and corner-to-corner sharpness as a high priority. I've heard that the Canon 50/2.5 Macro performs well in that application.

thanks for doing the test - great work. i'd love to see outdoor portraits compared...

Thankyou for testing these len's- This has helped me with my decision


Pamela

The more I use this new 50 EX Macro, the more I love its optics but hate its s-l-o-w AF. Sigma needs to put HSM in every one of their EX lenses for crying out loud.

great test! was going to get that sigma macro!

I appreciate the test info. I have the 50 1.4 and have never been quite as thrilled with it as others. Mainly due to edge sharpness, even stopped way down. And on a 1.6x body. I figured it was just below average copy, but your data shows the same thing. Nothing horrible, just I'd expect better. I'm not overly concerned because what I got it for genearally doesn't require sharp corners. And it does do nice portraits.

On a day-to-day basis, I'd use the 501.4 more than the 50EX: the speed and USM are big perks, and it's a more general lens. The 50EX is certainly a more "specialized" piece of glass: slow AF but amazing 1:1 reprod ratio and fantastic 7" MFD...great for those close ups and detail shots. I'm finding it's nice having these 2 lenses as they are really 2 different beasts. The only thing they really share in common is their 50mm FL. Too bad you're not "thrilled" with the 50f1.4. Thanks for the comments.

No EF 50 2.5 Macro? just kidding. Nice test.

I love my 50 1.4.

http://img.photobucket​.com …/greg9683/IMG_9​659-rs.jpg
http://img.photobucket​.com …yPhotography/CR​W_8813.jpg
http://img.photobucket​.com …yPhotography/IM​G_8423.jpg
http://img.photobucket​.com …tography/IMG_87​38_500.jpg
http://img.photobucket​.com …tography/IMG_87​35_500.jpg
http://img.photobucket​.com …graphy/IMG_9043​_chair.jpg

grego, for some reason the canon 50 macro loses interest for me in that it isn't even a true maco lens (1:2 native). But the new Canon 60mm f2.8 is getting rave reviews as tack sharp. Too bad it's "only" EF-S. As for the "fiddy one-four", ever since I got it, I've been lovin' more each day. It has slightly better resolving power than the Sigma 50EX, and its contrast is better too.

And of course it's faster than the Sigma 2.8. Not many other lens that give you as much value as that 50 1.4.

Yeah, that 60 looks interesting, but EF-S, is a turn off.