Sigma Announces the 50 f/1.4 Art Lens & More

[mb66energy]

Re: Sigma Announces the 50 f/1.4 Art Lens & More

Interesting lens - which has overall a similar construction like the Zeiss OTUS - Retrofocus like basic construction, an aspheric last element and the use of 4 SLD lenses in a 50mm (Zeiss has 6 lenses of different glass types with anomalous partial dispersion).

I expect a pricing near 1000 $/EUR, a lens sharpness which is close to the OTUS and the main difference between them will be the general rendering of images.

Very interesting lens!

 

[Northstar]

Re: Sigma Announces the 50 f/1.4 Art Lens & More

Hopefully another quality lens by Sigma! Hope its $899 like its little brother the 35mm 1.4.

I think you're spot on...$899 and they'll sell a bunch if them if the reviews are similar to the sigma 35mm.

 

[Tiosabas]

Re: Sigma Announces the 50 f/1.4 Art Lens & More

Sounds good, I wasn't really expecting this one so soon. With the redesign I hope that they retain the wonderful out of focus rendering that the current Sigma 50 1.4 has because the 35 Art does not have that magic. I also hope they fix the hideous onion bokeh problem. The size is a bit of a concern though as I think alot of people like myself like their primes to be a bit more discreet for everyday/family use. As a professionals choice for a 50 I think it will be good.

 

[slclick]

Re: Sigma Announces the 50 f/1.4 Art Lens & More

I own 2 new Sigma Art lenses and I can tell you except in certain Servo cases they AF as fast as most L lenses. The 24-105 is certainly as fast as the Canon and the 35 leaves nothing to be desired on my copy. No afma either. I haven't owned the zoom long enough to run Focal with it but haven't thought I need to from the few hundred shots I've used it for.

I rarely use my 50 1.4, it sits on my EOS 3 pretty much all the time.(That's my main portrait rig)

I bet this is priced in the high 600's USD and if it's anything like it's wider sibling I'll jump on it. I can see Ebay flooded with Canon 1.4's as of yesterday.

 

[Albi86]

Re: Sigma Announces the 50 f/1.4 Art Lens & More

Interesting lens, but I'm disappointed that they didn't just fix their previous 50mm.

Thing is, that lens is GREAT and is DIFFERENT. It was able to mix very high center sharpness with the creamiest bokeh. It had 3 problems: it was huge, AF was unreliable, and corners where never sharp even after stopping down. In a way, it was a sharper and much cheaper analogue of the Canon 50mm L, though obviously also a tad slower.

Fixing that lens, even only AF-wise, would have given them a real winner. Instead, it seems that the point of this lens is more like porting their 35mm A into a 50mm FL. Good for lens collectors, but I imagine many people in the field would rather take the 35mm and do some cropping. That's what I'd do, at least.

 

[Viggo]

Re: Sigma Announces the 50 f/1.4 Art Lens & More

Good for lens collectors, but I imagine many people in the field would rather take the 35mm and do some cropping. That's what I'd do, at least.

Shoot a subject against any background with the subject being the same size with both 35 and 50 and you'll see just how different it looks. A 35 and 50 are different beasts.

 

[Sporgon]

Re: Sigma Announces the 50 f/1.4 Art Lens & More

Good for lens collectors, but I imagine many people in the field would rather take the 35mm and do some cropping. That's what I'd do, at least.

Shoot a subject against any background with the subject being the same size with both 35 and 50 and you'll see just how different it looks. A 35 and 50 are different beasts.

+1

 

[ewg963]

Re: Sigma Announces the 50 f/1.4 Art Lens & More

Time will tell about the new Sigma 50 1.4 if it's as good as then I'll make my decision to purchase it. I'd love to replace my Canon 50 1.4 with something better. The jury is out until then.

 

[Efka76]

Re: Sigma Announces the 50 f/1.4 Art Lens & More

Wonderful news! Let's wait for some time when tests are performed and price drops a bit I really expect that Sigma 50 mm 1.4 will be much better than (20 years!!!! old) Canon 50 mm 1.4. I am really disappointed regarding Canon's approach to lenses. Canon's new lenses are superb quality (e.g. 24-70), however, their price tag is too high for average customers. From another side, Sigma & Tamron is able to manufacture and offer to customers PRO line lenses, which are really affordable.

I am really surprised that Canon was sleeping for 20 years and has not updated its 50 mm 1.4. Despite the fact tah Sigma's equivalent is 2x expensive I will sell my Canon 50 mm 1.4 and will by Sigma. Canon is starting to loose quite significant market to Sigma and Tamron. Canon users are not Apple users, they think! Accordingly, I would expect that many people will by Sigma 50 1.4, which is based on new technology, excells Canon, quality is Similar to Zeiss (I really expect that ) but price is affordable.

Canon should be ashamed to offer (in the future) non-L 50 mm 1.8 IS....

 

[infared]

Re: Sigma Announces the 50 f/1.4 Art Lens & More

I note that this new Sigma 50/1.4 is being introduced at $900. Canon's current 50/1.4 (a 20-year-old design) is about $400 or less (BuyDig offered it for $279 recently). If Canon introduces a new 50/1.4 in the same price range as this Sigma, some people will complain (in online forums) about Canon's pricing ... "They doubled the price!!!". If Canon introduces a really good 50/1.8 with IS, some people will compare its price to that of the nifty fifty ($125) and scream. However, a really good 50mm costs some $$$ to build. That's why the Sigma is $900 and not $400. That's why the Otus is $4000 and not $400. Even the manual focus Zeiss ZE 50/1.4 is $725.

If the lens is large and has a complex formula (13 elements in 8 groups)...the canon 50mm f/1.2L (has only 8 elements in 7 groups)...is not a GREAT lens...I am hoping that this new Sigma could be the best 50mm with AF for Canon on the market. This is REALLY exciting news to FINALLY "possibly" have a great normal lens for FF. I am keeping my fingers crossed here and hoping for the best. Canon has been sound asleep here for many years.

I think it's an exciting announcement too. But I disagree about Canon sleeping. They've been putting out new lenses steadily, just at other focal lengths; I could make a list of some really good ones. The 50L is a wonderful lens because of the way it draws -- it's made a lot of my favorite photos. A lot of photographers like the look. And it's weather-sealed once you add a filter. Canon obviously had different design priorities for the 50L than ultimate sharpness. It does have some faults, so it doesn't please everyone. I believe they omitted a floating rear element which is what helps make some other lenses so good. But with that it would have cost even more. I'm looking forward to seeing how this Sigma will compare.

When I said Canon has been sleeping "here"...I was referring to 50mm focal length. This is the NORMAL focal length for FF and the Canon offerings have been in my mind disrespectful of photography. I think Canon should be offering something solid, reliable and competent in this BASIC staple. The do not, as far as I am concerned. I bought the old Sigma 50mm f/1.4 (not without its own problems...but apparently I bought a good copy), because the canon offerings were so anemic...and the price on the L lens for what it offers is embarrassing. Also, if they ever do come to bat on this situation, (a 50mm f/2.0 IS is NOT addressing this BASIC issue) you can bet the pricing will suck the air out of the room. Whatever is going on over at Sigma Corp. I for one hope that they keep sending lots of it our way. Hope this new Sigma busts the 50mm situation wide open. We will see. (fingers crossed).

 

[Albi86]

Re: Sigma Announces the 50 f/1.4 Art Lens & More

Good for lens collectors, but I imagine many people in the field would rather take the 35mm and do some cropping. That's what I'd do, at least.

Shoot a subject against any background with the subject being the same size with both 35 and 50 and you'll see just how different it looks. A 35 and 50 are different beasts.

I'm not saying that a 35mm replaces EVERY 50mm. I'm saying that, for me at least, it replaces a 50mm with the same characteristics and optical signature. I'd rather invest the money in something that really lets me do something different or at least in a different way.

Always in my opinion, of course, 50mm is a useless FL unless the lens you're using is really special (and I found a little gem in the CV Nokton 58mm). It's usually too long for a walkaround and too short for portraits. I'd rather have with me a 35mm and a 85mm instead of a 35mm and a 50mm - again, especially if both lenses have similar characteristics.

 

[Slyham]

Re: Sigma Announces the 50 f/1.4 Art Lens & More

I know this thread has been exclusively about the 50mm, but I had a question about the 18-200. Why in the world do third party manufacturers go to 6.3 on the long end? Not being able to AF after 5.6 seems like a deal killer for anyone in the target market. What am I missing?

 

[Albi86]

Re: Sigma Announces the 50 f/1.4 Art Lens & More

I know this thread has been exclusively about the 50mm, but I had a question about the 18-200. Why in the world do third party manufacturers go to 6.3 on the long end? Not being able to AF after 5.6 seems like a deal killer for anyone in the target market. What am I missing?

That the lens tricks the camera and presents itself as a f/5.6

 

[hgraf]

Re: Sigma Announces the 50 f/1.4 Art Lens & More

As for the 18-200, I am excited about the possible performance of this lens, but I'm REALLY disappointed with yet another superzoom starting at 18mm. Why can't they start it at 15mm? Would be SO much more useful for travel IMHO. Even 17 would be better then bloody 18mm.

Would love to travel with ONE lens, but still can't.

 

[Loswr]

Re: Sigma Announces the 50 f/1.4 Art Lens & More

I know this thread has been exclusively about the 50mm, but I had a question about the 18-200. Why in the world do third party manufacturers go to 6.3 on the long end? Not being able to AF after 5.6 seems like a deal killer for anyone in the target market. What am I missing?

Making the long end f/6.3 reduces the production cost for the lens. As an extreme example, consider Tamron's 150-600mm: 600mm f/5.6 would need a 107mm front element, whereas 600mm f/6.3 neds a 95mm front element.

No worries about AF - the lens 'lies' to the camera body, telling it the aperture is f/5.6 even when it's f/6.3, so AF still works.

 

[hgraf]

Re: Sigma Announces the 50 f/1.4 Art Lens & More

I know this thread has been exclusively about the 50mm, but I had a question about the 18-200. Why in the world do third party manufacturers go to 6.3 on the long end? Not being able to AF after 5.6 seems like a deal killer for anyone in the target market. What am I missing?

There are many third party zooms that go beyond 5.6, and they focus fine. Why? They lie to the camera and say they are at 5.6 for focusing even though they aren't.

I do wonder if the zooms that SAY they only go down to 5.6 actually don't also go a little further and lie to the camera. I've always had that suspicion of one of my lenses. It just seems a little dark fully zoomed then 5.6 should be to my eyes. Maybe I'm wrong.

TTYL

 

[Slyham]

Re: Sigma Announces the 50 f/1.4 Art Lens & More

Thanks neuro and hgraf. Does AF suffer because the AF point is expecting 5.6 but getting 6.3?

 

[ahsanford]

Re: Sigma Announces the 50 f/1.4 Art Lens & More

Canon should be ashamed to offer (in the future) non-L 50 mm 1.8 IS....

Respectfully disagree. Each of the non-L IS refresh lenses are terrific.

I think it will be a battle of IS + small design (Canon) vs. speed + larger design. I'm guessing both will have excellent IQ.

- A

 

[YuengLinger]

Re: Sigma Announces the 50 f/1.4 Art Lens & More

"I see pros still using the old Canon 50 F/1.4 at weddings, concerts, etc. because the 1.2 lens isn't for them."

+1 So do I, as I've been lucky enough to assist a $10k wedding photographer, and she uses the 50mm 1.4 often for posed environmental shots of bride, groom, and other key participants individually.

My only personal gripe with my copy is just too soft below 1.8; however, I find its AF quick, almost equal to my 24-105mm in lower light.


"The thing is, even New Sigma struggles a lot with AF..."

-1! Don't know if this statement is based on personal experience or web echoes, but my Sigma 35mm 1.4 is another great AF performer, center spot or outer, indoors or out. I usually use it from two feet to twelve feet away from subject, people walking quickly towards me or past me, no problem nailing AF on the eyes or face. I have several of Canon's best AF lenses to compare to, and see no problem at all with this Sigma.

I had what was likely a good copy of the Canon ef 35mm 1.4L, but it was too soft wide open and had too much purple fringing, noticeable even at 5.6 in a few shots. Why do I say good copy? Because I sent it to CPS and they sent it back saying it was "well with in specifications." (I have sent lenses to them with complaints, e.g. a kit 24-105mm having strange contrast issues and dodgy IS, and had the lenses serviced and returned wonderfully improved. So I did TRY to give my ef 35mm 1.4 a fair chance.) To be fair to the Canon, for the occasional landscape shot (on a tripod), it was astoundingly sharp for middle and far distance. Incredible even.

I love sample images I see online from the Canon ef 50mm 1.2L, and I've gone out for location portraits with a local photography professor who uses practically nothing else and gets consistently great shots, but the pro I mentioned above, and some thoughtful reviews online convinced me to save my money on this one, putting it instead towards my favorite portrait lens, the ef 85mm 1.2L.

Cheers to Sigma for cranking up the competition! If I ever have to replace my ef 50mm 1.4, I hope the Sigma reviews well!

 

[Loswr]

Re: Sigma Announces the 50 f/1.4 Art Lens & More

I do wonder if the zooms that SAY they only go down to 5.6 actually don't also go a little further and lie to the camera. I've always had that suspicion of one of my lenses. It just seems a little dark fully zoomed then 5.6 should be to my eyes. Maybe I'm wrong.

You're not wrong, for two reasons.

The first is rounding - if you look at the patents, the 70-300L is f/5.85 at the long end, for example. That's not just true for variable aperture zooms, either - for example, the 24-70/2.8L II is really f/2.91, and the 200-400/4 + 1.4x is actually f/4.12 without the TC and f/5.77 with the TC. Different "f/5.6" lenses have different real apertures.

The second is that the f/number is calculated, not measured (and the real f/number differs from the canonical stop increments because the lens' focal length isn't quite as long as stated, or the iris diaphragm diameter isn't quite as big, or more likely both). But it's still a calculated number, stated in f-stops. If you actually measure the light transmission, that's T-stops, and you always find that some light is lost (mostly due to internal reflection of light - antireflective coatings aren't perfect, so more elements usually means a lower T-stop). For example, the 24-70/2.8L II and 16-35/2.8L II are both f/2.8 lenses, but the 24-70 has a T-stop of 3.0 (meaning 0.2-stops are lost), while the 16-35 has a T-stop of 3.3, so at 24mm f/2.8 it's 1/3-stop darker than the 24-70 at f/2.8. If you're shooting in an autoexposure mode, the camera will compensate if the difference is big enough.

Thanks neuro and hgraf. Does AF suffer because the AF point is expecting 5.6 but getting 6.3?

Theoretically, the accuracy would be slightly less. Practically, it probably makes no difference (or at least, any difference is insignificant compared to the AF issues that result from the 3rd party lens makers needing to reverse-engineer the AF protocols).