Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM

Supersignet wrote in post #15329625
Mine works flawlessly with my 5dii

This is good to hear... maybe I just got one of the early models and they have since corrected any issues?

It's on order fingers crossed... it will be a winner.

Thanks.
Hatch

Lens need some contrast to focus wide open in low light. It just takes some getting used to. It seems better with my mkIII than with my mkII.

pyro1 wrote in post #15329960
Lens need some contrast to focus wide open in low light. It just takes some getting used to. It seems better with my mkIII than with my mkII.

Good to hear it is performing better on the 5D3. Thanks for the info.
Hatch

Not_a_Canon wrote in post #15333687

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/nola2t/82493972​22/
Presley by NOLA_2T, on Flickr

Love it. What's lighting the front of the dog?

hello to all,

Since the past day I have been reading all this thread since page 1... (really).

I have a crop camera (Canon 60D), and a big fan of the Sigma 30mm 1.4. I also have a Sigma 50mm 1.4, which I like very much; but not as much as the 30mm.

More and more I am willing to purchase the Sigma 85mm 1.4; according to the pictures I have seen, and the experiences shared in this thread.

However I am still wondering for the following:

While shooting wide open, the DOF is so thin, that I rarely have both eyes in focus; and I forget even to have the whole face in focus.
And this with a crop camera... I believe that when using a full frame camera the DOF is even thinner.

I don't understand how you all achieve to have pictures taken wide open (f1.4 or f1.6) and a have the full face, or even body sharp in focus??

Thanks in advance for feedback

Kind regards from Belgium

Yves

Nightdiver13 wrote in post #15334039
Love it. What's lighting the front of the dog?

It's lighting from my glass door behind me. Thanks!

hoefie wrote in post #15334477
While shooting wide open, the DOF is so thin, that I rarely have both eyes in focus; and I forget even to have the whole face in focus.
And this with a crop camera... I believe that when using a full frame camera the DOF is even thinner.

I don't understand how you all achieve to have pictures taken wide open (f1.4 or f1.6) and a have the full face, or even body sharp in focus??

Thanks in advance for feedback

Kind regards from Belgium

Yves

FF vs Crop

At FF, you are shooting at true 85mm. 20 foot from subject at 1.4 = 1.4 foot of DOF. With crop body 85mm = 127'ishmm and at 1.4 you get .9 foot of DOF at same distance from subject.

thanks. It makes sense. Altough I always thought that using a FF the DOF was thinner... But I understand the concept...

Lovin' this lens again.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …las-pixgalore/8257228460/

Still new to the whole PEOPLE photography thing and definitely new to babies lol.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/nola2t/82594192​49/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/nola2t/82604882​26/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/nola2t/82604895​16/

Second day with my Sigma 85. 20 image stitch. Recommended to view in 1600.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/defiantx/825981​2472/

defiantimage wrote in post #15348194
Second day with my Sigma 85. 20 image stitch. Recommended to view in 1600.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/defiantx/825981​2472/
Jill_Brenizer Method by llambert86, on Flickr

defiantimage wrote in post #15350787

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/defiantx/826204​6735/
JillLakeFullbodyLogo by llambert86, on Flickr

Thanks for sharing and giving the lens it's credit it deserves with these great shots. I was getting tired of seeing random shots with this lens, nothing useful to help me make a decision on purchasing this lens. I'll def keep it on my wish list