Waiting for a Sigma 50 "A" like their 35 to appear?

[ScottyP]

It seems like there's a big demand for a new 50 mm lens. The old sigma 50 mm got mixed reviews, and even the Canon 50 mm lenses get mixed reviews. If sigma could make a 50 mm lens that is as well made as their new 35mm lens, it should sell like hot cakes, right?

 

[alexturton]

If they made a 50mm 1.2 with similar quality to their new 35 and under £1k I'd buy it.

 

[Hannes]

to me it isn't so much a case of if but rather when they will launch it. I'm honestly surprised that it wasn't the first A lens to be released but then 35mm makes a lot of sense on a crop camera as well as a full frame one

 

[Ewinter]

God yes. Can't wait

 

[pwp]

I foolishly sold a very good EF 50 f/1.4 and replaced it with the well reviewed Sigma 50 F/1.4. When it nailed focus it was fantastic, but the AF was so inconsistent that the lens couldn't be trusted and sat unused.

But a new Sigma 50 as good as the new 35? That would be interesting and would likely sell its socks off. Personally I wouldn't get one or any other prime in the 24-70 range because the new EF 24-70 f/2.8II has rendered every prime in that range obsolete for the way I shoot. I've sold my Sigma 50 f/1.4, my 24 f/1.4II and if I had a 35 that would be gone too. The new zoom is amazing and primes just sat unused.

But that's just me. There is a huge market for stellar primes and an update from Sigma would be a welcome big seller.

-PW

 

[bvukich]

I'm more interested in the 85, but the 50 would be nice too.

 

[infared]

Hmmmm....I recently bought the 35mm and have owned the Sigma 50 for a couple of years now...and I love both lenses. The fifty must be a good copy because it hits focus just fine for me....Oh don't get me wrong...I would love to see a 50mm with the across-the-frame sharpness of my new 35mm. That would be fantastic. I find it interesting that there are relatively weak choices for a normal lens for a full-frame camera. I find this odd because the lens has much simpler construction than a wide or tele lens...but I guess it can be made very complicated (and a lot better) like the upcoming Zeiss 55mm f/1.4 ZE with 12 elements which will cost upwards of $3500 for a manual focus lens but is touted to be the best 50mm ever produced. We shall see.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zb_t5pZuMAM&feature=fvwrel
If Sigma launches a fast, new Art-Line 50mm with the image quality of the 35mm...I would be very interested, especially if the cost is as reasonable as the 35mm.

 

[Ewinter]

I'd get both the 50 and the 85 if they made them like their 35.

Don't get me wrong, the 24-70 II is awesome. Great for work, but i prefer using >f2 primes for my personal stuff

 

[ScottyP]

I'd be on the buy list at $850.00 if it were f/1.4. Unless Canon somehow swooped in suddenly with an IS version at 2.0 for the same price. But Canon does not swoop fast.

 

[CarlTN]

My Voigtlander Nokton SLii 58mm f/1.4, has across the frame sharpness wide open, along with fantastic color and contrast. It's just a manual Nikon-mount lens, but I really don't feel the need to buy another 50mm lens. Its focus confirmation works great, via the adapter. And the focus ring is a pleasure to use.

In my opinion, Sigma (or anyone) should make a faster lens, such as an f/0.9 in EF mount. That would be interesting. It might be worth paying over $2k (even for a Sigma!)...provided of course that it was decently sharp and focused well. Better would be a 95mm version, even at a correspondingly higher cost.

 

[brad-man]

I use my standard zoom for 50mm. I have the Sigma 35, and am hoping the 85 is next. Wait. Did I hear someone say 24?

 

[silvestography]

I foolishly sold a very good EF 50 f/1.4 and replaced it with the well reviewed Sigma 50 F/1.4. When it nailed focus it was fantastic, but the AF was so inconsistent that the lens couldn't be trusted and sat unused.

But a new Sigma 50 as good as the new 35? That would be interesting and would likely sell its socks off. Personally I wouldn't get one or any other prime in the 24-70 range because the new EF 24-70 f/2.8II has rendered every prime in that range obsolete for the way I shoot. I've sold my Sigma 50 f/1.4, my 24 f/1.4II and if I had a 35 that would be gone too. The new zoom is amazing and primes just sat unused.

But that's just me. There is a huge market for stellar primes and an update from Sigma would be a welcome big seller.

-PW

Let's not forget that Sigma is likely to update their 24-70 f/2.8 to fit under their new company model. If they stick up with their "L Glass Killer" releases, a lens like that might be, likewise, more worth getting than any of their primes in that range.

 

[Dylan777]

Count me in for that. Current 50L has nice bokeh, but not quite sharp. Not to mention, focus shift.

 

[CarlTN]

I foolishly sold a very good EF 50 f/1.4 and replaced it with the well reviewed Sigma 50 F/1.4. When it nailed focus it was fantastic, but the AF was so inconsistent that the lens couldn't be trusted and sat unused.

But a new Sigma 50 as good as the new 35? That would be interesting and would likely sell its socks off. Personally I wouldn't get one or any other prime in the 24-70 range because the new EF 24-70 f/2.8II has rendered every prime in that range obsolete for the way I shoot. I've sold my Sigma 50 f/1.4, my 24 f/1.4II and if I had a 35 that would be gone too. The new zoom is amazing and primes just sat unused.

But that's just me. There is a huge market for stellar primes and an update from Sigma would be a welcome big seller.

-PW

Let's not forget that Sigma is likely to update their 24-70 f/2.8 to fit under their new company model. If they stick up with their "L Glass Killer" releases, a lens like that might be, likewise, more worth getting than any of their primes in that range.

Agreed, and the price might be comparable to the Tamron...or even beneath it, if there's no "OS". But Sigma are slow to release new lenses...so that would be a 2014 or 2015 lens, wouldn't it?

 

[CarlTN]

I'd rather see Sigma do a 19mm or 20mm or 21mm wide angle "A" lens. There's nothing available for Canon that's a prime, wide and auto-focus.

Canon's widest is 24mm and if Sigma did a 24mm, they'd just be copying Canon. They should man up and do something new.

Sigma have had a 20mm f/1.8, I guess it wasn't worthy? Didn't look like it was.

 

[mb66energy]

I'd rather see Sigma do a 19mm or 20mm or 21mm wide angle "A" lens. There's nothing available for Canon that's a prime, wide and auto-focus.

Canon's widest is 24mm and if Sigma did a 24mm, they'd just be copying Canon. They should man up and do something new.

Sigma have had a 20mm f/1.8, I guess it wasn't worthy? Didn't look like it was.

@CarlTN
I took a look at "The Digital Picture" and compared the Sigma 1.8 20 to the Canon 16-35 2.8 ii (at 20mm), both at f/2.8 and with EOS 1Ds mk ii:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=375&Camera=9&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=412&CameraComp=9&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=1&APIComp=0
Comparing ISO Charts isn't everything but in this case I think it is a good hint about the IQ of the Sigma. It just doesn't improve too much if you close it furthermore.

@dilbert: That's right, for me a 16 or 17mm f/4.0 with great IQ, small footprint and reasonable price would be very welcome (if it's from Canon or Sigma or ... doesn't matter).

 

[brad-man]

I'd rather see Sigma do a 19mm or 20mm or 21mm wide angle "A" lens. There's nothing available for Canon that's a prime, wide and auto-focus.

Canon's widest is 24mm and if Sigma did a 24mm, they'd just be copying Canon. They should man up and do something new.

Have to respectfully disagree. An inferior lens manufacturer would make lenses other than what Canon offers so as to offer no apples to apples comparisons. Sigma is making (so far in their art line) superior lenses in critical flavors that go head to head with the best that Canon has...

 

[RLPhoto]

If they make the rumored 135 f/1.8, a 50mm 1.2, and a 24 1.4, with the quality of the 35mm 1.4. Bam, I'm dumping all my canon primes and switching to sigma. 8)

 

[Albi86]

I'd rather see Sigma do a 19mm or 20mm or 21mm wide angle "A" lens. There's nothing available for Canon that's a prime, wide and auto-focus.

Canon's widest is 24mm and if Sigma did a 24mm, they'd just be copying Canon. They should man up and do something new.

That could be said about the 35mm too, but it seems that it made many people happy (including me).

24, 28, 35, 50, 58, 85, 100 and 135 are very popular and "recognizable" focal lengths. Canon, Nikon, Sony, zeiss etc have their own version. Sigma is just joining the big game - at least for now. However they had a 20mm, so it might be that something wider will come.

I wouldn't buy the 50mm. The focal length on ff is too similar for me - just a bit of cropping. However, the run lured 135mm.... That's another story.... Slurp!

 

[Pitbullo]

If/when Sigma updates their 50 1.4 into the Art line, they should make it a f/1.2 just to annoy Canon. Would be awesome!