50mm 1.4 Sigma / Canon

K

k3wt

Suspended / Banned
Messages
100
Edit My Images
Yes
If both lenses were the same price would you go for the Sigma?

Cheers
 
I bought the Sigma as the test reports I read, at the time, suggested the Sigma as the better one, so if they were the same price I would still buy the Sigma
one of the reports http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/392-sigma_50_14_canon
4* for Optical Quality and Mechanical Quality
 
Last edited:
How about low light AF?
 
I do like my Canon lenses, but have to say that going on the reports and reviews I have read about these two particular lenses, I would probably go for the Sigma.
 
I went for the Sigma.

I don't think I've read a single review that places the Canon ahead of the Sigma.
 
I'm currently waiting on delivery of my Sigma 50 1.4. Due to the Christmas rush pretty much everywhere apart from the major retailers have back orders. It should be here Mon-Wed.

I spent literally weeks looking at every source of info I could find on the subject, actually starting here and looking through Flickr and basically every single person has said that the Canon is older technology with the added worry of the front element having the damage rendering focusing impossible. The Sigma has a much nicer bokeh that's almost butter like, and on all the sample images I've seen, it's sharper.

If money is a major concern (and to be honest, if I hadn't had my back pay it would have been!) then the Canon is a very nice lens, but you'd need to be a lot more careful not to damage it. The Sigma is a bit of a price jump, but is newer technology and has better image quality form everything I've seen and read. The ONLY issue with the Sigma from what I've found is that it can have the front/back focusing issue which results in either having to send off for calibration or returning it for replacement.
 
I've just bought the Sigma - IQ seems to be quite a bit better especially wide open, and the build quality seems very good. It is quite big and heavy though.
 
Well, this thread has made my mind up. Sigma it is. Fed up with focus issues with nifty fifty.
 
Canon is built like crap but focuses well and delivers sharp photos. The problem with sigma is a very high chance of getting focus problems, and compatibility problems in the future. If you go for sigma - buy new (and that comes from somebody who buys 90% gear 2nd hand)
 
Well, at least we have a very high chance of reading about a very high chance of focus issues in internet forums.

I recently tried my Siggy agains my Canon 50mm f2.5 which I had considered to be my sharpest lens and I found that the Siggy at least equals the f2.5 and possibly betters it for both sharpness and available light focus ability.

On the subject of Siggy focus issues...

My own Siggy was written off as a hopeless pile of poo by someone who I could clearly see was nodding forward or backward after he'd half pressed the shutter button and you just can't do that and expect to hit focus with a f1.4. You can't hold Siggy responsible for poor technique.
 
Never had a problem with mine that wasn't user induced either. As for the same price; I was quite happy to pay the extra for it!
 
woof woof said:
My own Siggy was written off as a hopeless pile of poo by someone who I could clearly see was nodding forward or backward after he'd half pressed the shutter button and you just can't do that and expect to hit focus with a f1.4. You can't hold Siggy responsible for poor technique.
Click to expand...

Funny you should mention that, I was watching the Creative Live/Jasmine Star live video stream the other day and was amazed to see how much she bobs her head and camera every time she presses the shutter button.
 
The23rdman said:
Well, this thread has made my mind up. Sigma it is. Fed up with focus issues with nifty fifty.
Click to expand...

So was I. The nifty is phenomenally good for the price but recently wandering around in fog and near darkness, the hunting was driving me insane, and I don't know if I was subconsciously sabotaging myself or not, but I was suddenly far more interested in things that were a total pain in the rear to get shots of with it. My eyesight is getting pretty poor so manual focusing was also problematic (really must get my eyes tested in work, it's free!). It was quite frustrating.

Still, the nifty fifty had 5+ years use out of it , and it's still in perfect working condition and pin sharp. I just wish there were other lenses that were silly cheap compared to their bigger brothers!
 
The Sigma F1.4 is designed to give the best possible performance at F1.4 on a full frame camera. In particular, it reduces vignetting (shadowing in the corners of the image for those not familiar with the jargon) to a minimum. The Canon gives its best performance at much tighter apertures - around F7 or F8.

I have a crop-framed camera and weight is a major issue with me so I bought the Canon. I haven't regretted it since.
 
alexhcowley said:
The Sigma F1.4 is designed to give the best possible performance at F1.4
Click to expand...

Dunno where you've got that from but I don't believe it.

It's not razor sharp wide open although by all accounts it's better than the Canon. According to reviews it actually hits max sharpness at f4-5.6 and I think I'd agree with that.
 
He said 'the best possible performance' not 'the lens' best performance'; subtle difference!
 
\hi a few of my friends have dropped the 50mm 1.4 i favour of the 85mm 1.4 Sigma , they say the 50mm is too wide???

Merc
 
Merc, depends what you want it for surely. If it's portraits then it's probably too wide on full frame, but i've been using a 40mm equivalent lens for much of my photography and i've found it very good.
 
Well I got my 5D finally so got to try it out. It seems very sharp at 1.4 to me. Focus seems to be fine when it nails it but it does hunt around quite a bit in low light. Don't have the Canon to compare to though and apparently the 5D isn't great for this.

f1.4


Olympus Trip by Grum Wynne, on Flickr
 

Sackboy pose by Niall Allen, on Flickr

I've managed to muck up my colour profiles so it's all washed out. I'm far too tired to figure out what's gone wrong with them since yesterday! That photo is from RAW on my 30D with no editing other than a smidge of noise reduction. The lens FINALLY arrived today 15 days after ordering! Oh, and yes I'd have one over the Canon!
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Well, at least we have a very high chance of reading about a very high chance of focus issues in internet forums.
Click to expand...
Probably true. People who don't have problems generally don't post reviews so I think you do need to take this with a pinch of salt.

It's true to say that it seems more likely that you might have focusing issues with the Sigma but this doesn't mean you will.

In my case, the Sigma is spot on at 1.4 (with a slight focus shift backwards at smaller apertures - target still sharp though - tested on a tripod with a chart). My Canon 50/1.8 backfocuses by a pretty large amount at all apertures. So there you go - all manufacturers can put out dodgy stuff.

If you buy new from a UK supplier you'll get a three year warranty (if you register) and Sigma will fix it if you do happen to get one with focussing issues
 
i think before i buy, ill have a good try with the sigma and canon versions.. just to make sure i get a goodun!!
 
woof woof said:
I still don't believe it.
Click to expand...

:lol: 'The Sigma F1.4 is designed to give the best possible performance at F1.4'

If it wasn't designed to give the best possible performance that they could offer in that price range, then why would they even bother producing it? It wouldn't sell at its current price if it didn't have great performance wide open! Of course the lens will be sharper stopped down.. But that is a different thing altogether..
 
If you don't mind me having my 2d worth being a newbie, I reckon we can get spoilt a little nowadays. I mean reading all the posts the Sigma seems a better lens, but that doesn't make the Canon a poor lens, I reckon for what it cost, it was still a good buy at the time.
 
on both aps-c and 135 max sharpness is reached at f28 but the corners are not particularly great especially on a 135 frame. Wide open the sigma is very good wide open.


woof woof said:
Dunno where you've got that from but I don't believe it.

It's not razor sharp wide open although by all accounts it's better than the Canon. According to reviews it actually hits max sharpness at f4-5.6 and I think I'd agree with that.
Click to expand...
 
SamuelHearn said:
:lol: 'The Sigma F1.4 is designed to give the best possible performance at F1.4'

If it wasn't designed to give the best possible performance that they could offer in that price range, then why would they even bother producing it?QUOTE]


I have the Siggy and it's actually relatively soft at f1.4. It may be better than much older 50mm designs like the Canon but it isn't as sharp as Sigma's own 30mm, which I also own, at f1.4. I therefore don't really believe that Sigma set out to do the best possible job they could with this lens at f1.4 as at least one of their own lenses shows that they can design a lens to be sharper at f1.4. As for why Siggy have produced the lens, from what I've read they're designed it with a different design philosophy than that used with for example the older Canon and traditional German designs and to have better central performance rather than across the frame.

Some on line reviews seem to say the same thing as me about performance at f1.4 so I suppose it's up to each of us to make our minds up if this lens is for us. I love mine but I won't claim that it's razor sharp at f1.4 because it isn't, not when pixel peeping anyway. It may be sharp for a 50mm at f1.4 and better than the Canon but I've never used that.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I got this lens only yesterday and i have to agree that it's not that sharp at f1.4.

But at f8 its amazingly sharp .I dont think i'll be using it at f1.4 anyway so i'm not that bothered.

All in all for me i'm very impressed by this lens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top