Whats the best 50mm at f1.4?

I've had a lot of 50mm lenses. In the Canon EOS mount, I've had the 1.4 (manual focus like a sandbox), a 1.2L about 2 years ago (when focus was weak), and now a Zeiss 1.4. It's very nice, but recent reads about the newer UY date code 1.2L has me jonesing a bit.

But I maybe (only maybe) don't need a 1.2. The focus is SO slim, I would probably stop it down a tad, maybe 1.4 or 1.8. I've read the Zeiss 50 2.0 Makro isn't necessarily outstanding except for close focus's. I'm looking for general purpose and I have a macro 100 (Zeiss f2).

I'm looking for bokeh, edge quality on a ff and a good "feel". The Zeiss 1.4 is OK, but maybe not stellar. I've heard about the Sigma, but apparently it usually needs to get calibrated. Is it worth it -- and even then, I've read that it is very inconsistant. And how's the wide open performance? (At least the 1.2L wouldn't be wide open.)

Do I keep my 1.4ZE, or try the 1.2L again, or try the Sigma?

I just got a Sigma 50mm 1.4, and it didn't need calibration and it focuses just fine. And it's wicked sharp in the middle at 1.4, which when you think about it, is the part that really matters. I think the bokeh is amazing and I would say it's worth it.

I just got the Sigma as well and don't need to send it in for calibration. Focus needed pushed back a tiny bit but seems to be pretty consistent, however f/1.4 gives a tricky DOF to work with so it's hard to tell how much is user error and how much is lens inconsistency! The lens is TACK sharp wide open (needs skill tho, which I don't necessarily have) and the bokeh is amazing.

f/2.8

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

Now that I have had the Sigma calibrated, I love it over the Canon as most seem to. Sharp wide open and smooth blur effect.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

ive read good reviews on the sigma, but i own a canon, im pretty happy with it.=D

thrash_273 wrote in post #10634243
ive read good reviews on the sigma, but i own a canon, im pretty happy with it.=D

The Canon is a good lens, but the stories of the AF sticking or stopping completely due to the deflected drive track scared me enough to sell mine, and the bokeh of the Sigma is a bit better too.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #10634271
The Canon is a good lens, but the stories of the AF sticking or stopping completely due to the deflected drive track scared me enough to sell mine, and the bokeh of the Sigma is a bit better too.

i got my 2nd copy w/in 2 years and i haven't had an incident as such.

thrash_273 wrote in post #10634292
i got my 2nd copy w/in 2 years and i haven't had an incident as such.

That is great, however it is out of warranty now, so if it does happen, you pay. It happens enough that there are several DIY fixxer upper posts out there on how to take the Canon apart to fix it.

The Sigma comes with a much longer warranty, so that helped the purchase for me. Plus the IQ was as good or better overall, so that was a big bonus. I think the Sigma hazes over a tiny bit more than the Canon wide-open.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #10634329
That is great, however it is out of warranty now, so if it does happen, you pay. It happens enough that there are several DIY fixxer upper posts out there on how to take the Canon apart to fix it.

The Sigma comes with a much longer warranty, so that helped the purchase for me. Plus the IQ was as good or better overall, so that was a big bonus. I think the Sigma hazes over a tiny bit more than the Canon wide-open.

we shall see then. i bought my 2nd copy 3 weeks ago, pretty much i got a year. its already had a pre-nup and on coming wedding, im gonna use this lens as much as i can and see if it'll give in.=D

thrash_273 wrote in post #10634355
we shall see then. i bought my 2nd copy 3 weeks ago, pretty much i got a year. its already had a pre-nup and on coming wedding, im gonna use this lens as much as i can and see if it'll give in.=D

Sounds like it will more than pay for itself, so I wouldn't even worry if there is an AF glitch later. Plus you can pick these up for under $300 if you are quick on the draw on the sale boards. The Sigma still goes for mid $400s...

cause its sigmaLux. to the original op, its a matter of budget and luck i guess, if its bad apple, its bad.

Going to the store tomorrow to check out 50's. Bob, I'm really on the fence about the Sigma, but I think it's worth a second try. Fwiw, I'll let you know what I find tomorrow evening...

Ian

mcluckie wrote in post #10633800
I've read the Zeiss 50 2.0 Makro isn't necessarily outstanding except for close focus's. I'm looking for general purpose and I have a macro 100 (Zeiss f2).

If you like the Zeiss 100 MP, you would like the 50 MP - they are very similar in rendering style. The 50 MP is generally a much better lens than the Zeiss 50/1.4 Planar. Unlike the planar which sucks wide open and up close the 50 MP is excellent at all apertures and distances.

As for sharpness.. well,

Looks like we are in a similar predicament mcluckie. From my experience with the Sigma which I've had one and used two, it has far too much CA even stopped down few notches. It's really a non starter for me. The 50/1.4 ZE is a bit soft wide open and I didn't like it till at f2.8 and it's wow!

For me it's really a battle between the 50L and the 50 MP and I think the Zeiss is edging it at the moment. Unlucky for me I have no shops here in Dublin to give the MP a try with.

wow those Zeiss samples are crazy.... i didn't think it was that good.