50mm: Wich one?
- Thread starter eddiemrg
- Start date
- Status
I have Sigma 50mm F1.4. The AFMA for this lens was 13 when I just bought it. I believe it would be a problem if I used it on a body has no AFMA feature. With AF adjustment, the lens is perfect. Few months ago I sent it back to Sigma maintenance center to adjust AF. I received the lens in two weeks with a perfect AF adjustment. The AFMA setting for this lens now is 0.
My points are:
If your camera body has AFMA feature, you don't need to worry about the AF issue.
If your camera body has no AFMA feature and you don't mind to send the lens back to Sigma maintenance center, the AF issue of this lens is also not an issue for you.
Otherwise, Canon 50mm F1.4 might be a better choice.
My points are:
If your camera body has AFMA feature, you don't need to worry about the AF issue.
If your camera body has no AFMA feature and you don't mind to send the lens back to Sigma maintenance center, the AF issue of this lens is also not an issue for you.
Otherwise, Canon 50mm F1.4 might be a better choice.
Upvote
0
I've used both the Sigma and Canon ver. of the 50mm 1.4. The Canon is definitely consistent and efficient. If a shot wasn't quite in focus, it was probably my own faut and not the lens'. But image quality and sharpness... the Sigma is way better; unfortunately, I think some of you would agree that the Sigma is a hit and miss. Sigma doesn't do a great job with quality control. Some people get front or back focusing issues, especially when you shoot anything below ~f/2.8. I ended up with a bad copy and I still have not sent it in to get it fixed or replaced. It is more expensive but I would definitely go for the sigma if I could test a few before I buy one.
Upvote
0
I'm perfectly happy with my Sigma 1.4! I MF when critical focus is necessary (but that's the case with any lens shot at wide aperture).
Oh, and I have a 50mm f/1.8 MK I that's really great when I need something compact
Oh, and I have a 50mm f/1.8 MK I that's really great when I need something compact
Upvote
0
Unfortunately AFMA is not that simple for this lens. Some of the lenses exhibit "schitzophrenic" AF.cliffwang said:
See Roger's Take here:
http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/canon/lenses/normal-range/sigma-50mm-f1.4-dg-hsm-for-canon
If you AFMA one of the lenses that exhibit this characteristic...you will throw the focus out at one end or the other.
He is a very reliable source and I am sure he has handled many of these lenses....his word weighs heavy for me.
That being said...I have a Sigma and have not really had a consistent focus problem. I get mostly keeper.
Really love the lens, especially considering what my other choices are for AF lenses.
Upvote
0
When I was choosing my 50 mm lens I had the same problem, which was easily solved
50 mm 1.8 - too cheap
50 mm 1.2 L - too expensive
50 mm 1.4 - reasonable price and good test results in many photographic forums. Of course i choose this option
50 mm 1.8 - too cheap
50 mm 1.2 L - too expensive
50 mm 1.4 - reasonable price and good test results in many photographic forums. Of course i choose this option
Upvote
0
I have shot with Canon 50mm 1.4, Sigma 50mm 1.4 and the Canon 50mm 1.2 and can say that the latter two are in a different league. I was disappointed with the canon 1.4 from many perspectives. If you have the money, the best solution is the Canon 1.2...it just has some extra contrast and color...aka "pop"...to the photos but the Sigma is a solid performer.
Have had a Sigma 50mm 1.4 for several years now and always had problems with it on my 50d. Despite tweaking the AFMA I could never seem to get it right and the autofocus would simply miss at anything wider than f2.
On my (still new to me) 5Diii it's night and day. Adjusted the AFMA and have been shooting away since with great results. I have shot several weddings now with the lens (didn't dare use it for weddings before) and have had good success with both servo and one shot autofocus.
I second the notion that sigma update the 50mm 1.4 to join the art line, the 35mm 1.4 has gotten great reviews!
Have had a Sigma 50mm 1.4 for several years now and always had problems with it on my 50d. Despite tweaking the AFMA I could never seem to get it right and the autofocus would simply miss at anything wider than f2.
On my (still new to me) 5Diii it's night and day. Adjusted the AFMA and have been shooting away since with great results. I have shot several weddings now with the lens (didn't dare use it for weddings before) and have had good success with both servo and one shot autofocus.
I second the notion that sigma update the 50mm 1.4 to join the art line, the 35mm 1.4 has gotten great reviews!
Upvote
0
I heard that before I purchased Sigma 50mm F1.4. However, I also read some comments from other websites about the improvement of this lens for its new version from 2011. Some people mention that the new version has much better QC and improved AF. That's why I decided to give it a try last year. I thought the worth case was returning the lens. Fortunately I gave it a try. The lens is excellent and I am very happy with it.infared said:
Upvote
0
I got the Sigma 1.4 recently after a few years of shooting with the nifty fifty. Shooting on full frame, no problems, good focus right out of the box. Overall very good image quality, the 1.8 can't touch it at 1.8 obviously. Also, no more pentagon-shaped bokeh. Haven't had any AF issues - the 5DIII locks it in fine even in low light.
I was calibrating it recently, and noticed that it only needed focus adjustment at 1 meter focusing distance and closer. As I pulled away, it was sharp at 0, so I just kept it at 0 and will be more careful with focus up close. (Edit, I wonder if that's the schizophrenic focus that was mentioned. I should try it at longer distances...)
I was calibrating it recently, and noticed that it only needed focus adjustment at 1 meter focusing distance and closer. As I pulled away, it was sharp at 0, so I just kept it at 0 and will be more careful with focus up close. (Edit, I wonder if that's the schizophrenic focus that was mentioned. I should try it at longer distances...)
Upvote
0
Mt Spokane Photography said:
+1....I turfed out my EF 50 f/1.4 and replaced it with the Sigma 50 f/1.4. What a wasted exercise. Not only was the Sigma heavier, it took up more room in my bag than the beautifully compact Canon 50. Should have kept the Canon...
I shoot on FF and found the Sigma AF erratic to the point where I just couldn't trust it on jobs. Which means I never used it. When it nailed focus it was terrific, but the inconsistency was the killer. It's gone now, replaced with a 40 f/2.8 which I also hardly use. But at least it's small, dependable...a lens I can trust.
Really, I'm a zooms shooter with primes kicking in at the long telephoto end. The new 24-70 f/2.8II is such an extraordinary piece of glass that primes in this range seem redundant. I'm even looking at disposing of my 24 f/1.4II because there is little need for it any more. A f/2.8 or even slower lens is not the liability it used to be when we were tied to 100iso if we wanted quality files. Now with our new best friend,ISO, carefully shot/exposed images done on sky high iso settings can deliver superb commercial quality files.
-PW
Upvote
0
F/1 as the EF 50 replacement? Sure...and will you relish the weight and price penalty? Make it an f/2 but get the optics perfect and the weight realistic and the pricepoint somewhere where volume sales would happen. But the L 50? Now that might be a viable candidate for heavyweight, high priced f/1 goodness...bseitz234 said:1.0, like the 50L from the days of yore? :drjlo said:
-PW
Upvote
0
Mt Spokane Photography said:
If it were, it would have a reduced image circle and be a lot smaller.
I love mine on FF, it's a solid performer. So either I know how to handle the shallow DOF well or I have a brilliant copy (or both).
Upvote
0
I haven't used the canon 1.4, but my sigma 1.4 is awesome - now that it's on a FF. On the 7D it was so-so, with some awesome shots, but too many soft or poor focus photos (about 30-70). Now on a FF, it's spectacular. Focus is spot on every time, maybe a little soft a 1.4, but even at 1.8 it's superb - like a completely different lens. I was always having to redo the AF cal on the 7D, but haven't had to touch that since going FF.
I also like that it's a 77mm filter size - since most of my other lenses are the same.
I also like that it's a 77mm filter size - since most of my other lenses are the same.
Upvote
0
- Status
