Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art announced

if its similar to otus performance, count me in, even if I will have redundant FLs, hah.

I'm not sure I need a 50mm, being a 35/85 shooter... but I know when this lens comes out I'll sure be tempted if the price is right.

Still... should I?

draculr wrote in post #16610251
I'm not sure I need a 50mm, being a 35/85 shooter... but I know when this lens comes out I'll sure be tempted if the price is right.

Still... should I?

I'm in your shoes.

If this lens meets or exceeds to sigma 35, I'll be tempted to either jump on this, or the inevitable drop of used 50L prices.

mystik610 wrote in post #16610294
I'm in your shoes.

If this lens meets or exceeds to sigma 35, I'll be tempted to either jump on this, or the inevitable drop of used 50L prices.

It's funny how set i was on the 35, but with this announcement I'm feeling stuck.

I at least need to know the real retail, not the MSRP that sigma always list like 800 more than street value.

Now all we need is an announcement of an 85 1.4 Art lens.

tagnal wrote in post #16610936
Now all we need is an announcement of an 85 1.4 Art lens.

I'm holding out for a 24mm f/1.4 Art lens!

mystik610 wrote in post #16609823
It probably will. The 50L is great in many ways, but its a highly specialized lens IMO (lack of floating element, focus shift, etc etc).

If the Sigma 50 art is anything like the 35, it will excel in the areas that most people find valuable (sharpness wide open), and will the more universally useful lens.

Jap. Even if the sigma would cost 500$ and the price of the 50L drops id maybe buy the siggy but still would use the 50L. 1.2 and 1.4 is 1/3 stop more light and the images are so out of this world if you know how to use it..

However i bought gear to use it, not to make profit so for me its only interesting to see that sigma is going to produce more and more interesting lenses

mystik610 wrote in post #16609823
If the Sigma 50 art is anything like the 35, it will excel in the areas that most people find valuable (sharpness wide open), and will the more universally useful lens.

I mustn't be one of 'most people' because I won't buy this lens has AF inconsistencies, regardless of wide open sharpness. Accuracy is No. 1 for me in a lens with AF.

I bought 3 Sigma 50's and returned them all, not because they weren't sharp wide open, but because the AF sucked on all 3 copies on my camera.

kobeson wrote in post #16611281
I mustn't be one of 'most people' because I won't buy this lens has AF inconsistencies, regardless of wide open sharpness. Accuracy is No. 1 for me in a lens with AF.

I bought 3 Sigma 50's and returned them all, not because they weren't sharp wide open, but because the AF sucked on all 3 copies on my camera.

I had one copy of the "suckma" 50 I sent in 3x at a cost of roughly $25 shipping and 1 to 2 weeks waiting only to finally give up on that focal length from Sigma. My copy had an obvious defect in the front element I even noted in the return that the repair center kept missing.

I agree that if the lens can't auto focus properly nothing else matters to me either. How many photos can you sell to a client by saying " sure the capture is out of focus but look at the color rendition and the beautiful bokeh"?

With that being said I wouldn't have a problem with trying the lens out in store. If the price was agreeable to me at no more than $600 with accurate focusing I wouldn't hesitate in purchasing the lens.

Heaven only knows that all the time I've spent testing lens out in the store I owe them another purchase by now.

Thorrulz wrote in post #16611495
I had one copy of the "suckma" 50 I sent in 3x at a cost of roughly $25 shipping and 1 to 2 weeks waiting only to finally give up on that focal length from Sigma. My copy had an obvious defect in the front element I even noted in the return that the repair center kept missing.

I agree that if the lens can't auto focus properly nothing else matters to me either. How many photos can you sell to a client by saying " sure the capture is out of focus but look at the color rendition and the beautiful bokeh"?

With that being said I wouldn't have a problem with trying the lens out in store. If the price was agreeable to me at no more than $600 with accurate focusing I wouldn't hesitate in purchasing the lens.

Heaven only knows that all the time I've spent testing lens out in the store I owe them another purchase by now.

agreed about the in store testing. I have B&H around me so its great. What would be even better is if sigma came out with a 24 1.4 I'd be on that like white on rice.

kobeson wrote in post #16611281
I mustn't be one of 'most people' because I won't buy this lens has AF inconsistencies, regardless of wide open sharpness. Accuracy is No. 1 for me in a lens with AF.

I bought 3 Sigma 50's and returned them all, not because they weren't sharp wide open, but because the AF sucked on all 3 copies on my camera.

eh if my experience with the Sigma 35 ART is any indication of what to expect from the Sigma 50 ART, I'm not concerned. It's been very much reliable for portrait shoots and events.

The two guys I shoot with have the Sigma 35 as well. They've had no issues, and there have been times when I've had to pop their lenses on my camera, and I had no issues with their copies either.

Thorrulz wrote in post #16611495
I agree that if the lens can't auto focus properly nothing else matters to me either. How many photos can you sell to a client by saying " sure the capture is out of focus but look at the color rendition and the beautiful bokeh"?

Hasn't been an issue for me with the Sigma 35:

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/carloalcala/11​174280803/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/carloalcala/11​174266873/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/carloalcala/11​043691383/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/carloalcala/11​043665443/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/carloalcala/11​796831253/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/carloalcala/11​796762154/

kobeson wrote in post #16611281
I bought 3 Sigma 50's and returned them all, not because they weren't sharp wide open, but because the AF sucked on all 3 copies on my camera.

Thorrulz wrote in post #16611495
I agree that if the lens can't auto focus properly nothing else matters to me either.

The sigmas you are both referring to are pre-art, pre-dock sigmas. AF inconsistencies is a non-issue now with the new line of lenses even if they suck out the box. And before you reply and say you want your lens to work stright out of the box, well if thats the way you feel you are best sticking to Canon, but for the sake of £35 for the dock, all the AF issues will go away, and in my book its worth the small bit of hassle at the start.

Each to their own though, you will always get Sigma haters etc

xpfloyd wrote in post #16613008
The sigmas you are both referring to are pre-art, pre-dock sigmas. AF inconsistencies is a non-issue now with the new line of lenses even if they suck out the box. And before you reply and say you want your lens to work stright out of the box, well if thats the way you feel you are best sticking to Canon, but for the sake of £35 for the dock, all the AF issues will go away, and in my book its worth the small bit of hassle at the start.

Each to their own though, you will always get Sigma haters etc

Love my non-ART Sigma 85, never had any issues with my copy or the one I tested in store. Straight out if the box.

As said, if this new 50 has no AF issues when I try it out, I will purchase it. Not sure who the 'Sigma haters' are.

Sigma haters wasn't aimed at you in particular but there are plenty on these forums, the same names appear in all sigma threads slamming the brand. My general point was it doesn't matter even if it does have AF issues out of the box as they are easily sorted with the dock IMO