Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art for Canon Coming in April? [CR1]

[Canon Rumors]

Tweet

We’ve been told by two people that the goal at Sigma is to have the new Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art series lens to retailers around mid to late April of 2014. No official release date has been given to any of Sigma’s distributors as of yet.

Official pricing is expected in late March/early April along with a followup announcement with specifications, sample images and some additional marketing.

At this time the April goal is just that, a goal. There’s always a risk that ample production won’t be ready by then.

One piece of good news is that the Canon mount version of this lens will be the first to be released (along with the Sigma mount I imagine).

cr

[SwampYankee]

I'm really looking forward to this.  Sigma art lens have a really good reputation.  If this is a sharp as the hype Sigma is getting my money. The Canon 1.4 was so fragile (better build quality my ass) I had two of them go bad (broken auto focus) so I just stuck with the the old series 1 1.8.  Hoping for good things and a reasonable price but I will settle for super sharp

[GMCPhotographics]

I'm really looking forward to this.  Sigma art lens have a really good reputation.  If this is a sharp as the hype Sigma is getting my money. The Canon 1.4 was so fragile (better build quality my ass) I had two of them go bad (broken auto focus) so I just stuck with the the old series 1 1.8.  Hoping for good things and a reasonable price but I will settle for super sharp

Yep, be ready to put on your hard hat and cotton wool in your ears....the din from the Sigma fan boys will be deafening

[tianxiaozhang]

I'm really looking forward to this.  Sigma art lens have a really good reputation.  If this is a sharp as the hype Sigma is getting my money. The Canon 1.4 was so fragile (better build quality my ass) I had two of them go bad (broken auto focus) so I just stuck with the the old series 1 1.8.  Hoping for good things and a reasonable price but I will settle for super sharp

I'm on my 2nd 50/1.4.. first one's auto focus broke twice, the second one's shutter diaphragm is about to be stuck whenever stopped down (less than 2 years old) so I'm using it at 1.4 only and need a 1.8 for smaller aperture....

All I need is something reliable..

[dadgummit]

If you want a lens that will last more than a year or so It looks like the new Sigma 50 will be our only option now that it is rumored that canon is unveiling another micro usm in their new yet-to-be-announced 50.

When did the 50mm go from being the standard to being the dumping ground for fragile or focus shifting lenses? My first slr was a 55mm and that was the only lens I had, I still have a fondness for that length but the only one I have in my kit is the Zeiss 50MP.

[infared]

I am really looking forward to the reviews and the dish on this new 50mm!!!! Can't wait.  I bypassed all of the Canon lenses (because of lack of quality or over-priced-4-what-it-is)....and currently own a Sigma 50mm f/1.4. Really like my copy...but I plan on watching the circus and then maybe in a year or so picking up the new Art 50mm when the price drops a little.   I am sure I will get a good buck for my 50mm even if the new one is killer....because a lot of people are not going to spend over a grand for a spectacular (I hope) normal lens.  It has THIRTEEN  elements for God's sake....it better be REALLY good or it will be a lead zeppelin. We shall see very soon!!!! This is the most exciting lens release this spring as far as I am concerned. (yes....I own the 35mm!) :-)

[Etienne]

My Canon 50 1.4 works fine, but doesn't get a lot of use, so I'm in no hurry.
But I would love to see a robust, sharp, contrasty, fast focussing 50 1.4 WITH IS.
Not holding my breath on that. 

[RGomezPhotos]

After testing the new Sigma 24-70mm, I'm really excited about what Sigma is doing. Okay, the Canon 24-70L might be sharper. But worth 3x the price. I doubt it.

I love the high contrast, sharpness and bokeh of my Zeiss 50mm. But up until the Otus, it was also one of the most expensive. I'm happy that there some very worthy comparable brands and competitive pricing.

[distant.star]

.
Sigma is going to turn me into a prime-only photographer.

I've been so pleased with their 35mm that I'll surely get this 50mm.

The Canon 24-105 is sub-par in comparison to the Sigma 35 (and presumably this new 50) so I'll be using it rarely, especially since I rarely take it past 70mm where it starts getting really mushy.

So, then I get an 85mm -- either a new Sigma when it's made or a Canon L. And with the 135mmL I have, that's all I need.

Oh, and for wides, I've got my trusty 17-40. (And a Rokinon14mm for fun stuff.)

I say let's get a container full of the new 50s on a ship and deliver it to B&H ASAP. I'll be standing in line.

[Radiating]

My Canon 50 1.4 works fine, but doesn't get a lot of use, so I'm in no hurry.
But I would love to see a robust, sharp, contrasty, fast focussing 50 1.4 WITH IS.
Not holding my breath on that.

I think you're really missing the point of this lens. This isn't just some random 50mm lens that's maybe kind of good.

Read about the Zeiss Otus, and then imagine a lens that is 89% as good with autofocus. That's this lens.

The resolution data for the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART which has been verified by third parties indicates this lens is twice as good as anything other lens in it's segment with autofocus. In some cases this lens is five times better than competitors, that makes it good enough to make everything else obsolete.

For reference the difference between the worst superzoom available on crop, at it's worst setting and the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II on full frame at it's best setting is right around the same as the difference between this lens and it's best competitor.

This lens is a really big deal. Some people have been waiting for something like this for decades. It's the first standard focal length autofocusing prime with pro level resolution wide open.

[infared]

My Canon 50 1.4 works fine, but doesn't get a lot of use, so I'm in no hurry.
But I would love to see a robust, sharp, contrasty, fast focussing 50 1.4 WITH IS.
Not holding my breath on that.

I think you're really missing the point of this lens. This isn't just some random 50mm lens that's maybe kind of good.

Read about the Zeiss Otus, and then imagine a lens that is 89% as good with autofocus. That's this lens.

The resolution data for the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART which has been verified by third parties indicates this lens is twice as good as anything other lens in it's segment with autofocus. In some cases this lens is five times better than competitors, that makes it good enough to make everything else obsolete.

For reference the difference between the worst superzoom available on crop, at it's worst setting and the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II on full frame at it's best setting is right around the same as the difference between this lens and it's best competitor.

This lens is a really big deal. Some people have been waiting for something like this for decades. It's the first standard focal length autofocusing prime with pro level resolution wide open.

One has to ask...why did this take so long and why does Can have 3 "normal" primes that will be surpassed by a 3rd party company, (to be fair, the Canon 50mm f/1.2 is good...but not GREAT...especially at that price point)..Why did Nikon just release another VERY mediocre normal lens and charge a ridiculous price based on its performance.   To me this is baffling. We are talking about a FF normal lens...this is the most vital focal length...and the two biggest manufacturers have treated it like the red-headed step child... I never understood that.

[Albi86]

One has to ask...why did this take so long and why does Can have 3 "normal" primes that will be surpassed by a 3rd party company, (to be fair, the Canon 50mm f/1.2 is good...but not GREAT...especially at that price point)..Why did Nikon just release another VERY mediocre normal lens and charge a ridiculous price based on its performance.   To me this is baffling. We are talking about a FF normal lens...this is the most vital focal length...and the two biggest manufacturers have treated it like the red-headed step child... I never understood that.

Why Canon and Nikon have pretty much skipped developing an EVF and contrast AF until most recent times? Why does the iPhone have a more sofisticated flash than a pro DSLR (when it has one at all)?

One of the good things about competition is that it disproves certain de facto situations that seem to derive from objective technical limits. As long as no one offers a really good 50mm, the offer of Canon and Nikon doesn't look bad. Then came the Otus, but at that price tag it was certainly in another league. This Sigma seems bound to show that yes, you can build a very good and affordable 50/1.4 if you want to.

It was the same with the 35mm: Canon and Nikon top offers were regarded as "as good as it gets"; it took the Sigma 35mm to show that actually there was plenty of room for improvement. The Tammy 150-600 has also pretty much shattered the dogma that a decent 600mm lens has to cost north of $10,000.

[GMCPhotographics]

.
Sigma is going to turn me into a prime-only photographer.

I've been so pleased with their 35mm that I'll surely get this 50mm.

The Canon 24-105 is sub-par in comparison to the Sigma 35 (and presumably this new 50) so I'll be using it rarely, especially since I rarely take it past 70mm where it starts getting really mushy.

So, then I get an 85mm -- either a new Sigma when it's made or a Canon L. And with the 135mmL I have, that's all I need.

Oh, and for wides, I've got my trusty 17-40. (And a Rokinon14mm for fun stuff.)

I say let's get a container full of the new 50s on a ship and deliver it to B&H ASAP. I'll be standing in line.

Just remember bud that being a prime only photographer doesn't make you a better photographer...being a better photographer makes you a better photographer and often that's gear independent. I personally like to go wide with a zoom and then primes over 35mm. Works for me.

[cayenne]

I'm curious.

Why do you think, did Sigma for only for a f/1.4 rather than down to the f/1.2 of the Canon L 50mm ?

[Albi86]

I'm curious.

Why do you think, did Sigma for only for a f/1.4 rather than down to the f/1.2 of the Canon L 50mm ?

Because it's going to be 815g with f/1.4

The extra glass for top performance at f/1.2 would have been an overkill. I'm more surprised that Zeiss didn't go for f/1.2 considering they definitely had the budget.