Sigma vs Zeiss vs Canon

[sanj]

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=941&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=917&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=941&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=115&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

What with this Canon??

 

[Loswr]

Let's see…you're comparing the Canon 50/1.4 to a Sigma 50/1.4 that is >20 years newer and costs over twice as much. How would a 1993 Honda Accord stack up against a 2014 Acura TL in terms of features and performance? Hint: the former would pretty much suck by comparison.

Much more surprising is when that Acura TL performs almost as well as a BMW 760Li. What with this Zeiss?

 

[sanj]

Also comparing it with the Zeiss… I think from f2 onwards the Sigma corners look better!! And here is the comparison with the most expensive Canon 50mm…. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=941&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=403&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=1

Looks WORSE…
One other point: Why should Canon not update its lenses for >20 years while others are doing so without having the might of Canon? Does Canon not want its customers to have better? Am thinking…

 

[Loswr]

Does Canon not want its customers to have better?

Canon wants its customers to buy lenses. The Canon 50/1.8 is among their most popular lenses, primarily because it's cheap. The 50/1.4 is also quite popular. A lot more people are going to buy a $400 lens than a $950 or $4000 lens.

 

[sanj]

But but what about the people who want a good quality 50mm and are willing to pay appropriate money?

And don't you think lots of people will buy the Sigma?

 

[Loswr]

But but what about the people who want a good quality 50mm and are willing to pay appropriate money?

And don't you think lots of people will buy the Sigma?

I think the Sigma 50/1.4 will be pretty popular.

We've seen Canon recently bring out several new EF non-L primes with IS (24/28/35), and I expect we'll see an updated 50mm with IS soon. The IQ of those new lenses is quite good (compare the 35/2 IS to the Sigma 35/1.4 Art, for example).

 

[distant.star]

But but what about the people who want a good quality 50mm and are willing to pay appropriate money?

And don't you think lots of people will buy the Sigma?

"Appropriate money"?

I'd suggest, like beauty, appropriate money is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[sanj]

When I used the word appropriate, I was thinking Zeiss.

 

[sanj]

But but what about the people who want a good quality 50mm and are willing to pay appropriate money?

And don't you think lots of people will buy the Sigma?

I think the Sigma 50/1.4 will be pretty popular.

We've seen Canon recently bring out several new EF non-L primes with IS (24/28/35), and I expect we'll see an updated 50mm with IS soon. The IQ of those new lenses is quite good (compare the 35/2 IS to the Sigma 35/1.4 Art, for example).

That would be super. And with Sigma setting new standards, Canon will have to beat it. Then we will all get a super duper lens.

 

[BL]

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=941&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=917&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=941&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=115&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

What with this Canon??

I wouldn't get too upset about this. Competition is a really good thing for consumers in the long run

Just have to be patient...

 

[jrista]

But but what about the people who want a good quality 50mm and are willing to pay appropriate money?

And don't you think lots of people will buy the Sigma?

Canon DOES have the 50/1.2 lens. You can't deny the quality of that lens, despite it's spherical aberration, which as it so happens to be, is a DESIRABLE trait in a portrait lens for many photographers. Not everyone screams for perfect corner to corner sharpness. Sometimes, having soft corners is beneficial to guiding your viewers eyes to the subject...which tends to be near the center of the frame.

I've always admired photos taken with the Canon 50/1.2 and 85/1.2 lenses. They have a specific aesthetic appeal that is just WONDERFUL for portraiture specifically, and for a variety of other types of photography as well (such as street.) I find it ironic how so many people write off the Canon 50/1.2 and 85/1.2 lenses as if they don't even qualify to be included in the lineup for comparison.

So, what about the people who want quality? Canon offers a VERY high quality 50/1.2 lens that offers STUNNING and very aesthetically appealing results. You should give it a try sometime. Oh, and you'll spend about half as much on that as you would on an Otus...you won't get razor sharp corners, but it's HALF as much as an Otus.

 

[drjlo]

We've seen Canon recently bring out several new EF non-L primes with IS (24/28/35), and I expect we'll see an updated 50mm with IS soon. The IQ of those new lenses is quite good (compare the 35/2 IS to the Sigma 35/1.4 Art, for example).

I also think the next Canon 50 mm, be it 50 f/2 IS or 50 f/1.4 Mk II will have quite improved optics competitive with the new offerings from other companies. I realize "real" photographers enjoy the size and weight punishment dished out by the likes of Sigma 50 ART and Otus, but I for one love the lighter and smaller primes Canon has been putting out.

The real problem is WHEN is Canon going to bless us with their new 50 mm :'(

 

[Sporgon]

Also comparing it with the Zeiss… I think from f2 onwards the Sigma corners look better!! And here is the comparison with the most expensive Canon 50mm…. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=941&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=403&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=1[/url
Looks WORSE…
One other point: Why should Canon not update its lenses for >20 years while others are doing so without having the might of Canon? Does Canon not want its customers to have better? Am thinking…

During the 'twenty years or so' Canon has been developing it's zoom tech, cumulating with such remarkable lenses as the 24-70II & 70-200II and so on. Primes have taken a back seat but this may result in Canon producing a 50mm with the same optic configuration if they think the market's large enough at the price.

 

[sanj]

But but what about the people who want a good quality 50mm and are willing to pay appropriate money?

And don't you think lots of people will buy the Sigma?

Canon DOES have the 50/1.2 lens. You can't deny the quality of that lens, despite it's spherical aberration, which as it so happens to be, is a DESIRABLE trait in a portrait lens for many photographers. Not everyone screams for perfect corner to corner sharpness. Sometimes, having soft corners is beneficial to guiding your viewers eyes to the subject...which tends to be near the center of the frame.

I've always admired photos taken with the Canon 50/1.2 and 85/1.2 lenses. They have a specific aesthetic appeal that is just WONDERFUL for portraiture specifically, and for a variety of other types of photography as well (such as street.) I find it ironic how so many people write off the Canon 50/1.2 and 85/1.2 lenses as if they don't even qualify to be included in the lineup for comparison.

So, what about the people who want quality? Canon offers a VERY high quality 50/1.2 lens that offers STUNNING and very aesthetically appealing results. You should give it a try sometime. Oh, and you'll spend about half as much on that as you would on an Otus...you won't get razor sharp corners, but it's HALF as much as an Otus.

So. Am I to infer that if Canon comes out with 50/1.2 II that is sharper and has better corner to corner sharpness then you would not DESIRE to use it?

 

[sagittariansrock]

I see the discontent on this forum about Canon not yet having a perfect fast 50mm, a tack-sharp UWA zoom, etc., and I learnt a few days ago that Nikon brought out their f/1.4 autofocus primes, 24mm and 35mm, only in 2010. That must have made for a lot of irritated professionals!

 

[jrista]

But but what about the people who want a good quality 50mm and are willing to pay appropriate money?

And don't you think lots of people will buy the Sigma?

Canon DOES have the 50/1.2 lens. You can't deny the quality of that lens, despite it's spherical aberration, which as it so happens to be, is a DESIRABLE trait in a portrait lens for many photographers. Not everyone screams for perfect corner to corner sharpness. Sometimes, having soft corners is beneficial to guiding your viewers eyes to the subject...which tends to be near the center of the frame.

I've always admired photos taken with the Canon 50/1.2 and 85/1.2 lenses. They have a specific aesthetic appeal that is just WONDERFUL for portraiture specifically, and for a variety of other types of photography as well (such as street.) I find it ironic how so many people write off the Canon 50/1.2 and 85/1.2 lenses as if they don't even qualify to be included in the lineup for comparison.

So, what about the people who want quality? Canon offers a VERY high quality 50/1.2 lens that offers STUNNING and very aesthetically appealing results. You should give it a try sometime. Oh, and you'll spend about half as much on that as you would on an Otus...you won't get razor sharp corners, but it's HALF as much as an Otus.

So. Am I to infer that if Canon comes out with 50/1.2 II that is sharper and has better corner to corner sharpness then you would not DESIRE to use it?

I'm sure a lot of people would. I'm also sure that a lot of the people who currently love the soft-focus traits of the current 50/1.2 would be bummed if Canon copied the Otus design with razor sharp focus corner to corner. It's better to have a DIVERSITY of lenses with different traits, than for all manufacturers to make exactly the same things that behave exactly the same way.

I think the center performance of the 50/1.2 and 85/1.2 needs to be improved...in the grand scheme of things, it's a bit soft, and doesn't need to be. I do, however, hope Canon keeps the soft focus traits in place if they release a 50/1.2 II and 85/1.2 II. If I want a lens with perfect sharpness, I can always get the Otus...if Canon copies the Otus, then I'm suddenly left WITHOUT the option of buying a lens that purposely leaves in a certain amount of spherical aberration for artistic flare.

 

[Eldar]

To some extent it is good to see that the $3k extra for the Otus is giving something. But from a sharpness perspective, the Sigma looks good and I am really looking forward to get my hands on it to verify how it performs. But sharpness is only one aspect though.

My 35 Art´s AF is drifting again (a third AFMA with Focal showed a further 4 step adjustment, on top of the 7 steps I got between the one I did when I got it and Christmas), so I must admit I am a bit skeptical to that part of sigma. But since so many are happy with it, I hope my AF problem is a one-off.

I do however agree with jrista regarding the 50L. The 35L and 85L are pretty much in the same boat. Chart porn reviews will rule them out, but looking at the quality images they produce in the right hands makes it very difficult to discard them as inferior lenses. I would hope Canon could update them optically and throw in IS. If they could keep the size and weight on the 50/1.4 and 50/1.2L about where it is, they would be very interesting alternatives. The Otus is a big chunk to carry and a manual one on top of that, so you think twice before you throw it in the bag for a trip.

 

[sanj]

I totally doubt that Canon makes lenses with soft edges on purpose. I think the soft edges are a result of technology limitations and cost saving.

 

[sagittariansrock]

My 35 Art´s AF is drifting again (a third AFMA with Focal showed a further 4 step adjustment, on top of the 7 steps I got between the one I did when I got it and Christmas), so I must admit I am a bit skeptical to that part of sigma. But since so many are happy with it, I hope my AF problem is a one-off.

I have a technical query here:

As far as I understand, the purpose of AFMA is not to 'fix' defective lenses, but calibrate a specified lens to a given camera to account for manufacturing tolerances.
Once the AFMA is done, the camera knows how much to compensate for this lens, and everything is hunky-dory.

But in what condition can AFMA drift as is happening in Eldar's case? Is it because something is moving within the lens and a gap is getting bigger or a cog is becoming more loose?

I am particularly interested since I just acquired a 35A (so far it looks like it is focusing right on target as shown below- spot focused on "6" using a peripheral point and center point respectively), I haven't run it through FoCal yet.

 

[Eldar]

My 35 Art´s AF is drifting again (a third AFMA with Focal showed a further 4 step adjustment, on top of the 7 steps I got between the one I did when I got it and Christmas), so I must admit I am a bit skeptical to that part of sigma. But since so many are happy with it, I hope my AF problem is a one-off.

I have a technical query here:

As far as I understand, the purpose of AFMA is not to 'fix' defective lenses, but calibrate a specified lens to a given camera to account for manufacturing tolerances.
Once the AFMA is done, the camera knows how much to compensate for this lens, and everything is hunky-dory.

But in what condition can AFMA drift as is happening in Eldar's case? Is it because something is moving within the lens and a gap is getting bigger or a cog is becoming more loose?

I am particularly interested since I just acquired a 35A (so far it looks like it is focusing right on target as shown below- spot focused on "6" using a peripheral point and center point respectively), I haven't run it through FoCal yet.

To be fair with Sigma, I will return it to service and see what they come up with. It might be an issue with this specific copy.