Sigma 85mm f/1.4

Z

Zonamoroza

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2
Name
Anna
Edit My Images
No
Thinking about Sigma 85mm f/1.4.
Somebody here using it? What do you think about that lens? Is that good idea to buy it?
 
It's big and heavy but it's a nice lens and almost certainly a little better than their excellent 50mm f1.4.
 
great lens, really enjoy using it. Very sharp. Great bokeh as well!


a dejected pianist by Rowan Hunn, on Flickr

DSC_7654.jpg



DSC_7766_Edit.jpgl


DSC_6488_Edit.jpg
 
Last edited:
Zonamoroza said:
Thinking about Sigma 85mm f/1.4.
...What do you think about that lens?...
Click to expand...

I'd leave it at that- 'thinking' that is:D

If you can test it first to counter the abysmal track record they have with build quality then when they get it right it performs well.

Personally I'd go OEM but I'll point out that I have in the past tried to use Sigma and had to return the lenses- trying several versions of the same lens in one instance. Now I'd rather spend the time shooting rather than mucking about wasting my time getting issues resolved so I'm fairly anti-sigma at the moment:lol:.

Depends on your agenda- price/quality/reliability etc. I have had OEM issues too but the ratio is much much smaller. Plenty here swear by Sigma although there's more than me who swear at them:p.
 
Dr O - they do have a poor track record with certain lenses but i believe their primes are far more reliable and consistent. It would probably help to have micro adjustment on your camera just in case, although the same could be said for any lens i suppose. :)
 
rampanthamster said:
Dr O - they do have a poor track record with certain lenses but i believe their primes are far more reliable and consistent. It would probably help to have micro adjustment on your camera just in case, although the same could be said for any lens i suppose. :)
Click to expand...

One of them was the 50mm f1.4 although first batch granted. I'll maybe try them again if/ when I get another lens. I do have micro adjust- tried a fair few settings as well although on one lens it was actually the AF that was broken anyway.
I think the main thing that annoys me is that Tamron seem to be able to get it right- fair enough they made a mess of the 17-50 when they added VC but on the whole Tamron seems more reliable as a 3rd party lens supplier to get it right first time than Sigma.
 
I think the big question is what camera do you have, FF, 1.3 or 1.6 crop?
 
I tried one of Sigmas demo 85mm f1.4 , ( if was a part of a large display of sigma glass so I assume that it was a good copy.) I took a couple of sample shots and then took the same shot with my (sorry now Robs!) Nikon 85mm, the Nikon was signifcantly sharper,

I was shooting in Manual and kept the settings the same by no means a sintific test But thought would add my 2P, I prefer the Nikon, The Bokeh of the Sigma was very impressive though.

Stuart
 
I am leaning towards this lens to replace my 85 1.8 i just sold. I dont think i can afford the 85 L and from what i have read, its not worth the extra over the sigma.

Sigma have been clever on their price point and seen a gap in the canon lens line up. One i wish to take adviantage of soon. As for the QC, I have had 3 sigma lenses and only one i wasnt happy with even after recalibration from sigma.
 
If only Canon would bring out an 85 1.4, but then I think the 85 1.2 would get hit pretty hard on sales... Still, while the Sigma is a fantastic lens when it works, the problems with build quality have pushed me towards a 135L. Definitely very different lenses but the Canon is a fabulous 135 whereas the 85 is a big risk. Paired with a 50 you might find the 135 a more useful lens, and I doubt you'd ever want to replace the 135 whereas I think with the Sigma there'd always be that urge to go for the red ring.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top