Is it worth going Sigma 50 1.4 (Non ART) to Canon 50 1.2L?

So I've had the Sigma 50 1.4 since it first came out. I've dealt with its inconsistent AF. I sent it in a while back to get it calibrated and I dont think it really made a difference.

I'm thinking about moving to the 50 1.2L instead. My main desire for this lens will be night time urban photography. Do you think its worth it? Think Tokyo neon lights and HK sidewalk eateries.

One of the other reasons I want to make the switch is the AF on the Sigma really annoys me how slow it is. Most of my USM Canon lenses AF much faster.

What do you guys think? I primarily want to shoot with it wide open using a 5DMKIII.

Thanks!

I would not keep a lens with AF that I can't trust, and there have been a few for me. So as a start I would agree with your notion to sell off the Sigma 50 if it is not hitting consistently.

As for the 50L, it can be a polarizing lens. I have had one for several years and I love it. The lens is quick and accurate for focusing, and it has really excellent flare performance and bokeh. The lens is reasonably sharp, it's OK for a super fast lens wide open and sharp stopped down. It is not 'razor sharp' by the standards of most stuff released in the last five years, but it is also not soft or a bad performer.

JeffreyG wrote in post #18298254
I would not keep a lens with AF that I can't trust, and there have been a few for me. So as a start I would agree with your notion to sell off the Sigma 50 if it is not hitting consistently.

As for the 50L, it can be a polarizing lens. I have had one for several years and I love it. The lens is quick and accurate for focusing, and it has really excellent flare performance and bokeh. The lens is reasonably sharp, it's OK for a super fast lens wide open and sharp stopped down. It is not 'razor sharp' by the standards of most stuff released in the last five years, but it is also not soft or a bad performer.

Totally agree!

Edit: this thread will probably tell you more than you ever wanted to know about the 50 mm 1.2L!
https://photography-on-the.net …read.php?t=1477​216&page=1

You will be disappointed if you want a faster focusing lens. the 50 1.2 isnt super fast like other usm like a 85 1.8. It probably isnt any faster then the Sigma 50 1.4 non art the Sigma 50 1.4 art is faster

ants wrote in post #18298241
I primarily want to shoot with it wide open using a 5DMKIII.

Go for it.
The only problem with the lens is focus-shift, but that does not apply to wide open shots.

That's why I skipped the 50L and also because it is well known that it isn't sharp wide open, the 50 Art is the only perfect 50mm.
I guess those 1200 people where lucky with a consistent Autofocus on an Art lens, i'm one of the lucky few!!!!
https://photography-on-the.net …ead.php?t=13748​30&page=81

i think its sharp, but what do i know???

The most significant issue with the Canon 50 f/1.2 L is focus shift which has been discussed in other threads and this is most evident at close range between f/1.4 and f/4 or so when focus shift is masked by greater depth of field. Manual focusing using live view helps tremendously but if accurate AF is critical at close range this is probably not the lens for you. The lens does not focus shift wide open at f/1.2. Here are two samples both shot at f/2 with my 7D ii using a tripod; see if you can guess which one was manually focused using live view

It is not the sharpest wide open, but the bokeh is to die for! (If you are in to that sort of thing). I don't find the focus less reliable than my other canon glass. I do use mine for street photography, mostly wide open.