December 16, 2017, 10:06:03 AM

Author Topic: Sigma 85 looks better in corners  (Read 6297 times)


canon rumors FORUM

Sigma 85 looks better in corners
« on: November 20, 2017, 11:06:37 AM »

ahsanford

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5856
  • USM > STM
Re: Sigma 85 looks better in corners
« Reply #1 on: November 20, 2017, 11:42:56 AM »
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1168&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=1085&CameraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Sigma has less vignetting. But I would take the Canon for the IS.

...and the AF.  The Sigma 85 and 135 Art apparently appear to be better AF-wise than the 35 / 50 Art, but I'd still go first party AF unless the large aperture application I need the lens for allows for a tripod or the time to chimp & reshoot. 

If you are shooting folks off-tripod / on-the-fly at events, weddings, reportage, etc. I'd forego the smaller corner sharpness opportunities for more of a sure thing with the AF, but that's just one guy's opinion.

- A

Viggo

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3120
Re: Sigma 85 looks better in corners
« Reply #2 on: November 20, 2017, 11:53:42 AM »
I shot a few today of a key ring in harsh lowing sunlight to produce the worst amount of fringing I could, to be honest, it’s nothing, seriously good.

I really like it so far, I don’t want to post any samples yet as I’m in the process of calibrating focus. To me, it looks like it’s the same with AF as any other brand new lens I’ve bought; The out of the box obvious calibration value does change over the first periode of use.
1dx mkII, 35 L II, 85 L IS, Broncolor Siros 800 L.

sanj

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2917
Re: Sigma 85 looks better in corners
« Reply #3 on: November 21, 2017, 03:15:05 AM »
Thank you guys

Viggo

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3120
Re: Sigma 85 looks better in corners
« Reply #4 on: November 21, 2017, 04:37:43 AM »
Just a happy 85 IS camper comment here, I’m excited, how on earth did I ever use a 135, 100 and 85 without IS?? ;D
1dx mkII, 35 L II, 85 L IS, Broncolor Siros 800 L.

YuengLinger

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1529
Re: Sigma 85 looks better in corners
« Reply #5 on: November 21, 2017, 06:33:07 AM »
Just a happy 85 IS camper comment here, I’m excited, how on earth did I ever use a 135, 100 and 85 without IS?? ;D

I blame my declining steadiness on age and parenthood.  Especially parenthood.  We now have a 1 year old who climbs like a monkey, moves chairs to get on tables, and will happily wave around a steak knife or a camera when found.  So, yes, IS has become an urgent need!

Viggo

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3120
Re: Sigma 85 looks better in corners
« Reply #6 on: November 21, 2017, 06:43:49 AM »
Just a happy 85 IS camper comment here, I’m excited, how on earth did I ever use a 135, 100 and 85 without IS?? ;D

I blame my declining steadiness on age and parenthood.  Especially parenthood.  We now have a 1 year old who climbs like a monkey, moves chairs to get on tables, and will happily wave around a steak knife or a camera when found.  So, yes, IS has become an urgent need!

LOL!

Showed my son a bunch of pictures of adults before and after the became parents and he didn’t know and just asked;

“What happened to these people, are they sick?” No, son, we parents are just your energy source, and we do wear out  ;D
1dx mkII, 35 L II, 85 L IS, Broncolor Siros 800 L.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Sigma 85 looks better in corners
« Reply #6 on: November 21, 2017, 06:43:49 AM »

SecureGSM

  • EOS 5D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 742
Re: Sigma 85 looks better in corners
« Reply #7 on: November 21, 2017, 07:41:01 AM »
Sigma has less vignetting? how is that even possible? I have been told by local experts that new Canon vignetting level is only 1.3EV in extreme corners. and no CA to boot.

I have been called full of crap, that I need to get the life, Sigma crowd and what is not for calling it as it is.
Sigma sharper across the frame and up to 2 full stop sharper in corners, less LoCA, less vignetting, better contrast and pop, equally as good rendition of out of focus areas and focus to out of focus transition.
no IS, 95% as good AF for One Shot situation centre and peripheral points. Sigma is a wrong tool for AI Servo subject tracking, not an event / run and gun lens. New Canon is jack of all trades type of lens, solid performer.
Sigma requires AFMA adjustment every few months due to internal heavy optics and mechanics wearing in. I was told by service centre that it takes up to 12 months for things to settle.


https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1168&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=1085&CameraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Sigma has less vignetting. But I would take the Canon for the IS.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2017, 08:27:36 AM by SecureGSM »

jaell

  • PowerShot G7 X Mark II
  • **
  • Posts: 15
Re: Sigma 85 looks better in corners
« Reply #8 on: November 21, 2017, 08:24:24 AM »
Sigma has less vignetting? how is that even possible? I have been told by local experts that new Canon vignetting level is only 1.3EV in extreme corners. and no CA to boot.


You know it's uncool to post photos hosted at a site, using their bandwidth, right? Given how much work Bryan does that the rest of us benefit from, and how up-front he is about the costs he incurs as a result, it's really bad manners to use his bandwidth and post his pictures here with nothing but his watermark for attribution. The least you could do would be to host the photos yourself so he's not incurring any costs for your posting.

And by the way, for those of us without a dog in your fight (I haven't made a decision yet about whether I'm going to buy a Sigma or the Canon 85 1.4 IS), your shtick is really wearing thin. You like the Sigma. We get it. Stop nailing yourself to the cross about it.

Personally, I don't feel like having to spend time every few months recalibrating a lens so it focuses right. Given that most lenses don't need such minute attention, I expect my equipment to work properly throughout its normal life. You obviously feel differently, and your Sigma 85mm works well for you. Can you just accept that not everyone has the same preferences and requirements for their equipment?
5D Mark IV / 6D converted to Infra-Red / EF 16-35mm f/4 IS L / EF 24-105mm f/4 IS L USM / EF 40mm f/2.8 STM pancake / EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro / EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM

SecureGSM

  • EOS 5D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 742
Re: Sigma 85 looks better in corners
« Reply #9 on: November 21, 2017, 08:47:04 AM »
another one... i have no part in this sigma vs canon game. all I mentioned is true. there is a lot of bias on CR forum for obvious reason.

deleted those links because it is apparently uncool. hope it helps.

buy what you please. you are on the fence apparently, I have data that may assist you to make an educated decision. just out of a good will.
I service my car every 6 month approx. it is what it is. No, I do not feel differently about Sigma.
Not suggesting what suits you best. but when people comes out with dubious claims in regards to subjects they have no knowledge about, I would not be afraid to raise my head and speak out.

it appears that you are the one that do not get it: I am not a blind brand supporter or a Sigma shill.
I sold all my Sigma Art primes but 85 Arft due to erratic AF behaviour on 5D IV.
there are facts and there is noise. the noise is that ALL Sigma lenses AF inconsistent. the fact is - not all of them do.

anyway, i think I am done with this subject. waste of efforts for nothing. off to a better things in my life.

jaell

  • PowerShot G7 X Mark II
  • **
  • Posts: 15
Re: Sigma 85 looks better in corners
« Reply #10 on: November 21, 2017, 08:55:49 AM »
And here's where I'm really conflicted. I like composing images with the subject not in the center of the frame where IQ is maximized. The Sigma is very appealing because the corner-to-corner sharpness, the lower CA, the lower vignetting, appeals to me.

But then, I spend months at a time abroad, and I simply cannot afford to have a lens that falls out of calibration and requires being attached to a dock and computer (with the right software installed) to be put back into calibration. I can't benefit from better corner IQ if the lens isn't focused where I want it to be.

Then on the other hand, I think, "Am I going to take a heavy 85mm prime with me in the field, in addition to my wide-angle & tele zooms and my general purpose lens? Isn't this mainly a portrait lens?" But then on a third hand, I remember that the majority of my photography is in the field, and I don't feel like spending $1200+ for a lens that will sit at home or in a bag most of the time.

Here's the big rub: there's a price difference between the two lenses, but the Sigma isn't low enough to simply say, "Get both; use the Sigma for X and the Canon for Y." And the Canon so far doesn't seem to be so good as to make this a slam-dunk decision. So there are a lot of people out there who want a good, definitive answer as far as which lens is "best." And the bottom line is neither one is "best." One is better than the other at some things, but not everything.
5D Mark IV / 6D converted to Infra-Red / EF 16-35mm f/4 IS L / EF 24-105mm f/4 IS L USM / EF 40mm f/2.8 STM pancake / EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro / EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM

jaell

  • PowerShot G7 X Mark II
  • **
  • Posts: 15
Re: Sigma 85 looks better in corners
« Reply #11 on: November 21, 2017, 09:13:47 AM »
another one... i have no part in this sigma vs canon game. all I mentioned is true. there is a lot of bias on CR forum for obvious reason.

deleted those links because it is apparently uncool. hope it helps.

buy what you please. you are on the fence apparently, I have data that may assist you to make an educated decision. just out of a good will.
I service my car every 6 month approx. it is what it is. No, I do not feel differently about Sigma.
Not suggesting what suits you best. but when people comes out with dubious claims in regards to subjects they have no knowledge about, I would not be afraid to raise my head and speak out.

it appears that you are the one that do not get it: I am not a blind brand supporter or a Sigma shill.
I sold all my Sigma Art primes but 85 Arft due to erratic AF behaviour on 5D IV.
there are facts and there is noise. the noise is that ALL Sigma lenses AF inconsistent. the fact is - not all of them do.

anyway, i think I am done with this subject. waste of efforts for nothing. off to a better things in my life.

No, I'm not "one that do not get it." I'm a guy who comes here, reads, mainly lurks, and I see over and over and over you picking fights with people. Just like you're getting defensive and trying to pick a fight with me.

To your car analogy: I'm a pilot. Every time I fly, before I get in the cockpit, I do a visual inspection of the plane. Every bit of it. Now, when I drive, how often do I even walk around my car to see if all 4 tires are inflated? Rarely. (Why? Because driving on a flat tire won't kill me in 10 seconds.) Does that mean I don't take care of my car, that I don't expect it to perform to my expectations? Absolutely not. It means that I have different expectations for different pieces of technology in my life. It's why we value cameras with magnesium bodies more than cameras with plastic bodies: we expect a magnesium-body camera to be more durable and less prone to breakage. So, ironically, we might be less careful with a more expensive camera (or L-series lens) than with a cheaper piece of equipment. In the end, I don't expect a lens to need routine maintenance. Sure, I can't expect a lens to stay in perfect shape if I'm carrying it in a backpack through a desert in a country far from home. But that's a world of difference away from having to dock a lens and re-calibrate it after a few months of light use doing portraits in a studio.

Some of us want what we perceive to be a more reliable piece of equipment.

Now, your experience and opinion is that the Sigma is not too much trouble and hits at a more-than-acceptable rate of in-focus shots. Congrats. Realize that you might have a better copy of the lens than others who report less-than-acceptable experiences. Also realize that other people have different opinions.

You have data. I've seen your posts, so I know about your testing. How many copies of the Sigma 85mm Art have you tested? Is it a representative sample of the thousands of copies that are in circulation? Again, maybe you've had better luck than other people getting copies that focus more accurately and reliably.

Now, to wrap up. You're putting words in my mouth. I never said you're a Sigma shill. I did say that your woe-is-me-I'm-right-everyone-else-is-wrong act is annoying. Some of your arguments rest on logical fallacies, because you've built up anyone who disagrees with you into a mass of people who say you're a shill. Anyone who questions your opinions and thinks that you're a bit too vehement is somehow questioning your expertise, your data, your facts, your incontrovertible logic. I don't have a single problem with the Sigma lens or your affinity for it. Quite the opposite: if I could be sure I'd get a 85mm Art that performed as well as your copy, I'd probably do so. But that's the problem: I am not willing to bet $1100-1200 that I'd get that. And that's why I've come here and asked if anyone has more data about the reliability (or lack thereof) of the Sigma's focusing. Because if the focusing issues are just here and there, and most copies perform to the level you've experienced, then that's a whole lot different from--what I've seen in these forums--the narrative that the Sigma is hit-and-miss with AF. But good for you that the Sigma works for you; no doubt anyone who has such a positive experience with a product wants other people to know about it. It doesn't make you a shill; it makes you someone who appreciates a good-performing piece of equipment.

But one thing it doesn't allow you to be is that jagoff who trashes anyone whose opinions or experiences are different from yours. Because ultimately, if you have better things to do with your life than argue with people on an online forum, by all means stop arguing and do those better things!
5D Mark IV / 6D converted to Infra-Red / EF 16-35mm f/4 IS L / EF 24-105mm f/4 IS L USM / EF 40mm f/2.8 STM pancake / EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro / EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM

SecureGSM

  • EOS 5D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 742
Re: Sigma 85 looks better in corners
« Reply #12 on: November 21, 2017, 09:14:18 AM »
ahhh, no. it does not work like this with Sigma. it is not a sudden drift and everything and all values are all over the shop. it is a sloooow process.. months and by a subtle amount. and even then you should be able to quickly recalibrate just by looking at the images you get. It is simple.

this is not a lens for a field work. far from it. if you after utmost resolution and detalisation even stopped down, then the Sigma may be what you are after. high resolution bodies, commercial settings, studio when you spend time and effort setting things right and would appreciate that extra bit of IQ - high level sort of work, precise stuff. not even apples to apples comparison.  For a field run and gun work I am all Canon -  holy trinity - F2.8 is good enough for most type of work that I come across. the light is crappy anyway but I manage to get shots out that seems to be good if not better.

On location portraits is a different story though. I would use prime lens as you can set things up to the level where one can utilise optical advantages in order to deliver an excitement to the client.



And here's where I'm really conflicted. I like composing images with the subject not in the center of the frame where IQ is maximized. The Sigma is very appealing because the corner-to-corner sharpness, the lower CA, the lower vignetting, appeals to me.

But then, I spend months at a time abroad, and I simply cannot afford to have a lens that falls out of calibration and requires being attached to a dock and computer (with the right software installed) to be put back into calibration. I can't benefit from better corner IQ if the lens isn't focused where I want it to be.

Then on the other hand, I think, "Am I going to take a heavy 85mm prime with me in the field, in addition to my wide-angle & tele zooms and my general purpose lens? Isn't this mainly a portrait lens?" But then on a third hand, I remember that the majority of my photography is in the field, and I don't feel like spending $1200+ for a lens that will sit at home or in a bag most of the time.

Here's the big rub: there's a price difference between the two lenses, but the Sigma isn't low enough to simply say, "Get both; use the Sigma for X and the Canon for Y." And the Canon so far doesn't seem to be so good as to make this a slam-dunk decision. So there are a lot of people out there who want a good, definitive answer as far as which lens is "best." And the bottom line is neither one is "best." One is better than the other at some things, but not everything.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2017, 09:43:58 AM by SecureGSM »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Sigma 85 looks better in corners
« Reply #12 on: November 21, 2017, 09:14:18 AM »

SecureGSM

  • EOS 5D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 742
Re: Sigma 85 looks better in corners
« Reply #13 on: November 21, 2017, 09:37:14 AM »
ok, my last post. it becoming unreasonable:

1. I am offering AFMA Canon and Sigma lens calibration for people for last couple of years as side miniscule size business ( AFMA calibration service). more like a fun. I charge peanuts for the service. it is more a service to community. fun club.
I have calibrated 11 Sigma 85 Art lenses and hundreds of other Sigma Art lenses personally over last couple of years. does it ring a bell with you? do you think I can confidently say that I know a thing or two about Sigma Art lenses.

i am not picking up fight with people. I point out what seems to be bias or misinformation or mistake. some people reply with disrespect.

your statement: may be you have a better luck with your lens than others - I hope I was able to explain why what I say is what it is. next time I need to fly the plane I know who to ask for assistance.

I am sure that you do not fly your aircrafts by luck, do you?
I am sure that you expert in what you do. I do not question that for a second. why you are questioning someone else expertise in something that you are not proficient enough yourself?
anyway, I am sure that there hundreds of other experts that can assist you with you Sigma or Canon dilema.

i am seriously done with this. All I wanted to share my experience with people that may be interested to know what is really going on. All I get is irritated replies and disbelief and all for no reason.
anyway, not a single post from me on CR from now on.



Realize that you might have a better copy of the lens than others who report less-than-acceptable experiences. Also realize that other people have different opinions.

You have data. I've seen your posts, so I know about your testing. How many copies of the Sigma 85mm Art have you tested? Is it a representative sample of the thousands of copies that are in circulation? Again, maybe you've had better luck than other people getting copies that focus more accurately and reliably.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2017, 10:16:30 AM by SecureGSM »

Viggo

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3120
Re: Sigma 85 looks better in corners
« Reply #14 on: November 21, 2017, 09:52:09 AM »
If one thinks that the Canon isn’t sharp enough to compose in the corners, and this is meant in the nicest possible way, you obviously haven’t tried it. I recommend try it before discarding it. I have shot to push it today and corners are looking very sweet indeed.
1dx mkII, 35 L II, 85 L IS, Broncolor Siros 800 L.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Sigma 85 looks better in corners
« Reply #14 on: November 21, 2017, 09:52:09 AM »