Sigma 85 f/1.4 EX DG Available Soon

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS 1D MK II
Jul 20, 2010
7,585
312
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
HTML:
<p><strong>Ronkonkoma, NY, Oct. 14, 2010 –</strong> Sigma Corporation of America (www.sigmaphoto.com), a leading researcher, developer, manufacturer and service provider of some of the world’s most impressive lines of lenses, cameras and flashes, is pleased to announce that the company’s 85mm F1.4 EX DG HSM lens is now available for purchase in the United States for the MSRP of $1,400 and the estimated street price of $899.</p>
<p>This large aperture, medium telephoto lens is optimized for use with full-frame, DSLR cameras and is especially ideal for portrait and low light photography. When used on digital cameras with an APS-C size image sensor, it effectively becomes a 127.5mm F1.4 lens.</p>
<p>“This lens is an excellent addition to our prime lens line-up and is a great performer for a variety of photographers. For the sports or photojournalist photographer, the Hyper Sonic Motor will keep up with fast-paced action sequences; the 1.4 maximum aperture provides the ability to work at high shutter speeds under low existing light conditions,” said Mark Amir-Hamzeh, general manager of Sigma Corporation of America. “That same high-speed aperture is great for a portrait photographer who is looking to isolate details in their subject, with a pleasant, out-of-focus background. One-touch, full-time manual focus is perfect for the critical, professional photographer.”</p>
<p>The 85mm F1.4 EX DG HSM also contains one Special Low Dispersion (SLD) glass element and a glass mold element to offer excellent correction for all types of aberrations and to ensure superior optical performance. This lens is equipped with a rear focus system that minimizes fluctuation of aberration caused by focusing.</p>
<p>The Super Multi-Layer Coating reduces flare and ghost, even in backlight photography. The lens has a round, nine-blade diaphragm, which creates an attractive blur to the out-of-focus images, and comes with a petal-type hood to block out extraneous light. For digital cameras with an APS-C size image sensor, Sigma provides a dedicated hood adapter to expand the length of the lens hood and to block out extraneous light more effectively.</p>
<p><strong>CR’s Take

<span style="font-weight: normal;">I’m a big fan of the Sigma 50 f/1.4. I cannot wait to try the 85 out, this is definitely a lens and focal length I will review. </span></strong></p>
<p><strong>Preorder

<a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/727169-USA/Sigma_320101_85mm_f_1_4_EX_DG.html?BI=2466&KBID=3296">$899 @ B&H Photo</a>

<a href="http://www.adorama.com/SG8514EOS.html?kbid=64393">$899 @ Adorama</a>

</strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
 

kubelik

EOS 6D MK II
Aug 11, 2010
824
0
the big question for the canon version of this lens is, can it justify being priced over the 85 f/1.8? I'm interested in seeing them pitted against one another
 

Jamesy

EOS 7D MK II
Oct 15, 2010
774
0
If the Sigma 85 1.4 is anything like the Sigma 50 1.4, then we are in for a treat. It will be interesting to see the street price up here in Canada. The 50 1.4 carries a ten year warranty through Gentec in Canada.
 
G

Grummbeerbauer

Guest
I currently have the Canon 85 1.8, which is great value for its price, very sharp even wide open and has a great bokeh. The only downside I can think of is the purple fringing in contrasty scenes can be a bit of frustrating at times. If the new Sigma has no such weaknesses, and if Sigma got its AF algorithms sorted out, it might be an interesting -- and different from the 85 1.2 II also an affordable -- option.
Judging from Sigmas recent offerings, the odds that the new lens will be a decent if not excellent performer are quite good. For example, the 8-16 gets rave reviews everywhere, only the new 70-200 2.8 OS was a bit of a disappointment.
 
T

tzalmagor

Guest
I hope Sigma will make a 135mm lens, in hope it will be optically superior to the the Canon 135/f2.8 and cheaper than the Canon 135/2.0L - lost all hope Canon will ever do that.
 

Etienne

EOS 6D MK II
Sep 19, 2010
1,338
135
Ottawa Ontario
Is the Sigma 50 1.4 really all that good?

I want a good 50 1.4, and I've been hoping that Canon would upgrade theirs.
The Photozone review indicates that the Sigma has residual aberrations that give focus problems, particularly in the f 2.8 - 5.6 area. That makes me a little leery of the lens.

Anyone here have a comment on that?

If Canon doesn't upgrade the 50 1.4 soon, I may give the Sigma a try.
 

Etienne

EOS 6D MK II
Sep 19, 2010
1,338
135
Ottawa Ontario
PS... Like many others, I have the Canon 85 1.8, which is a great little lens at a very reasonable price ... The Sigma will have to awfully good to justify the extra $.
 

kubelik

EOS 6D MK II
Aug 11, 2010
824
0
sigma has some really great budget offerings that you can't really beat in terms of bang-for-the-buck ... but I haven't been all that convinced by any of their upmarket offerings. they have a lot of lenses that seem appealing (for instance, the 120-300 f/2.8, or 70-200 f/2.8 OS) that offer significant price savings and good specs but drop the ball in either AF or image quality (thankfully, almost never both areas at the same time). I'd really like to see them hit it out of the park for once (and then keep doing it)
 
D

deeznuts

Guest
tzalmagor said:
I hope Sigma will make a 135mm lens, in hope it will be optically superior to the the Canon 135/f2.8 and cheaper than the Canon 135/2.0L - lost all hope Canon will ever do that.
The sigma 135/2.0L is already pretty cheap. How cheap do you want it? You can grab one for $800. A Sigma 135mm would have to be 400-500 for me to even consider it over the 135L.
 

epsiloneri

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2010
421
0
Etienne said:
Is the Sigma 50 1.4 really all that good?
I love my sigma 50mm/1.4 optically. And the bokeh is superb. Unfortunately I've found the AF to be unreliable at distances larger than a few meters. Unless the AF has been fixed in later versions (I have an early copy), I would not recommend this lens.

Unfortunately, the sigmas I've tried have not been as reliable with AF as canons (in general). Unfortunately, because their lenses are often optically very good.
 
T

tzalmagor

Guest
deeznuts said:
tzalmagor said:
I hope Sigma will make a 135mm lens, in hope it will be optically superior to the the Canon 135/f2.8 and cheaper than the Canon 135/2.0L - lost all hope Canon will ever do that.
The sigma 135/2.0L is already pretty cheap. How cheap do you want it? You can grab one for $800. A Sigma 135mm would have to be 400-500 for me to even consider it over the 135L.
At the moment, Amazon and B&H sell the Canon 135mm f/2.0 L costs ~$970, so $500 sounds good to me. If Canon can make a good 85mm f/1.8 for $400, and outdated 135mm f/2.8 for $500, I would think $500 think Sigma can make a good 135mm for $500.


I can't make the photography equipment I buy tax deductible, my last name isn't Rothschild, and I'm not a drug dealer, so sometimes I'd rather save $500 on a lens than bling it with a red ring w/o compromising on quality.
 
F

Flake

Guest
Grendel said:
Reasonable in what way? Fair? here's a quote:
the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM Lens has proven very inconsistent for me in the focus accuracy department.

I have thrown out as many as 70% or more images from a single shoot of over 100 non-action, wide aperture shots because they were very OOF (Out of Focus). These were not even close-distance shots that are typically most challenging for shallow DOF lenses.


Though a higher percentage of the mis-focused shots were front-focused, a significant number were back-focused as well. Therefore, focus calibration is not going to help this lens.

I think that this lens would be better suited to a crop frame camera, I have sold the Canon f1.4 50mm in the hope of a replacement which I think will be a vain one as Canon haven't released a non L FF prime in too many years.

The Canon 135mm f/2.8 (which I do have) id not really a fair comparison with the 135mm f/2 because it is a specialised lens with an adjustable soft focus effect, even if I had the 135mm f/2 I'd still keep hold of this one.
 

epsiloneri

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2010
421
0
Flake said:
Reasonable in what way? Fair? here's a quote:
These were not even close-distance shots that are typically most challenging for shallow DOF lenses.
For my copy, AF works better for close distance shots, strangely enough. The AF actually only misbehave on distance shots (> a few meters).

Flake said:
I think that this lens would be better suited to a crop frame camera, I have sold the Canon f1.4 50mm in the hope of a replacement which I think will be a vain one as Canon haven't released a non L FF prime in too many years.
Why do would the Sigma 50mm/1.4 be better on a crop?
 
F

Flake

Guest
Because all FF lenses perform better on crop bodies which take advantage of the sweet spot
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,319
1,673
epsiloneri said:
Why do would the Sigma 50mm/1.4 be better on a crop?
For equivalent framing to use of the lens on FF, the depth of field on the crop body would be deeper. So, f tihere are AF issues, they would be masked on a crop body by the deeper DoF. It's the same reason you may never know if your body/lens has AF issues if you're only using variable-aperture (=slow) consumer zoom lenses (and that's why many 60D users who stick with the 18-135mm kit lens will not miss AF microadjustment).
 

epsiloneri

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2010
421
0
Flake said:
Because all FF lenses perform better on crop bodies which take advantage of the sweet spot
That's true, but the FF optical performance of the sigma is not much in question. Its border resolution is as good or better than the Canon EF 50mm f/1.2 USM L (which itself is not very good in the border resolution department; see photozone.de, or the review by dpreview.com). The problem with the sigma is its AF. And I cannot see how AF issues would be less on a crop body.

neuroanatomist said:
For equivalent framing to use of the lens on FF, the depth of field on the crop body would be deeper. So, f tihere are AF issues, they would be masked on a crop body by the deeper DoF.
Hehe, I think we've covered this topic before. Actually, AF issues get worse, if anything, with crop. I'm not going through the crop vs. FF lens/image equivalence thing again, but will merely give you an example that will make you immediately understand why. Imagine you have a focus error with a FF camera, such that the de-focused resolution is 1/160 of the image width (0.6%). Then the equivalent image in a crop camera, would be to crop that exact FF image with a factor 1.6x. The AF error would now be 1/100 (1%) of the image size - which is clearly worse. Resolution in terms of resolved minimum angle would of course be the same (the crop image is, after all, the central part of the same image as the FF).
 

Jamesy

EOS 7D MK II
Oct 15, 2010
774
0
I was at camera show today in Toronto and Sigma had a booth with both the 50/1.4 and the new 85/1.4. I tried them both on an XSi body. The bokeh seemed nice at first glance but it can be hard to tell by chimping. The 85 is smaller than I thought it would be - it is bigger than my 85/1.8 but not the 85L grapefruit.

The only odd behaviour I noted was the infinity focus to close seemed quite slow but close to infinity was pretty snappy. They mentioned it is in the neighbourhood of $1100 CDN.
 

Grendel

EOS T7i
Jul 20, 2010
94
0
53
Cv, OR, USA
code.google.com
Flake said:
Because all FF lenses perform better on crop bodies which take advantage of the sweet spot
Only if the lens offers good resolution to begin w/ -- even a 10MP 40D has a higher pixel density than any FF camera today. Hence the recent upgrades to MkII lenses, catering to existing APC-C/H densities and preparing for future MP increases on FF...

Reasonable in what way? Fair?
Well executed and fair, yep.