need to decide on a 50 mm

Ok so the canon 1.4 officially is done. I used it as long as I could

Do I want a sigma 1.4 or a 50 L?

I read the reviews on the sigma and it looks real appealing but It also said the AF was slow. i did have a sigma macro and I will say the canon L blew that away in terms of AF. I'm wondering if the canon 50 will be the same way.

What should I buy?
Thanks in advance.

Looks like you convinced yourself of the 50 L already.. why not go for it!

I heard many folks say the 1.2 was hard to nail focus, and I do really like to work with pets and moving subjects like children. I can buy the L any time, so if the Sigma is pretty decent it might be a better "for now" lens.

So I guess you could say I might be wanting to hear someone convince me why they like the sigma so much?

Since my 1.4 is dead I have no lens below a 2.8.

And I'm also debating buying a new vs used 1.2. There seems to be not too much price difference really

You don't have to shoot the 1.2 wide open, step it down to 1.4-2.8. Will give you a little extra leeway focus wise while still getting nice bokeh.


(who am I kidding though, if I had that lens I'd just shoot it at 1.2)

If you live somewhere where you can get decent rentals why not try the sigma 50 and see if you like it? If it doesn't work out just get the L and all you are out is the rental fee.

helios 44-2

clarkent1 wrote in post #16340010
helios 44-2

Pretty sure they want autofocus. MF primes is a whole nother story, way better selection than those 2.

abbypanda wrote in post #16339965
I heard many folks say the 1.2 was hard to nail focus, and I do really like to work with pets and moving subjects like children. I can buy the L any time, so if the Sigma is pretty decent it might be a better "for now" lens.

So I guess you could say I might be wanting to hear someone convince me why they like the sigma so much?

Since my 1.4 is dead I have no lens below a 2.8.

Because of it's AF, or because of the faster aperture? From what I've read, the L's AF is definitely better than the Sigma, and if you stop it down focusing won't be any harder to nail.

I would wait on the Sigma, I'd be really surprised if they didn't have a new 50mm on the horizon.

Obviously if you shoot at 1.2 you're gonna have a hard time nailing focus. It's not the lens that misses focus, its the fraction of a millimeter that the person moves as he's pressing the shutter that makes the focus go off...I mean cmon you're at 1.2...stop down to 1.8-2.0 and you're dead on

Try to find a good copy of the Sigma... Very impressive optically, even if the AF is so-so. Of course if you use a lot this focal length, you should take the "L".

Titi

Been wanting a 50mm lens since last year, but I've decided to wait for a new 50/1.4 or 50L2 or Sigma 50.

The current 50mm offerings just aren't good enough.

50L - focus shift, not sharp enough at f/1.2.
50/1.4 - Poor AF, poor build quality and not sharp enough.
Sigma 50 - "The Sigma AF lottery".

They all need to be upgraded a.s.a.p.

GO for the 50L

If your patient and you nail it youve got some amazing pictures

Ginga wrote in post #16340211
Been wanting a 50mm lens since last year, but I've decided to wait for a new 50/1.4 or 50L2 or Sigma 50.

The current 50mm offerings just aren't good enough.

50L - focus shift, not sharp enough at f/1.2.
50/1.4 - Poor AF, poor build quality and not sharp enough.
Sigma 50 - "The Sigma AF lottery".

They all need to be upgraded a.s.a.p.

Who says that? My 50L is almost as sharp as my 135L when the focus is right

If you absolutely need 1.2 and plan to use the lens at 1.2 the great majority of the time, you get the L. If not, you don't.