Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

FM Forum Rules
Canon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell	Search Used
1 2 3 … 7 8 end

Archive 2008 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

Matt Kerby
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #1 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

Thanks for doing this, it takes time and it's much appreciated.
Looks like your EF is a very nice and sharp copy, looks sharper than the EX wide open but I will agree the bokeh of the EX smokes em all, just super creamy. I would like to know how this lens is fairing as far as AF too, notice any FF or BF at distances @10'?

Dec 13, 2008 at 03:55 AM

mh2000
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #2 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

interesting tests! thanks for taking the time to post them!

yeah, Yakim made the 50/1.8 look pretty bad here, but in *my* real life experience I prefer what I get from it more often than the 50/1.4... tests are always special cases...

The Sigma 50 definitely has my interest! (I'm just no in an excited EF mount lens buying mood... otherwise I'd already have it).

Dec 13, 2008 at 04:23 AM

Greg Feldman
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #3 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

I'm crazy about my Sigmalux.

Greg

Dec 13, 2008 at 04:46 AM

kosin
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #4 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

Great job Yakim
Thanks a lot...

Dec 13, 2008 at 04:50 AM

Ariel Bravy
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #5 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

I'm in love with the bokeh from the Sigma. The harsh bokeh from my 50 1.4 is very apparent in images and the Sigma totally blows it away. The sharpness seems to be better as well.

I've never really liked the 50 1.4. It's been ehh, okay. I very well may consider upgrading to the Sigma.

Thank you very much for these tests Yakim!

Shooting happily,
Ariel.

Dec 13, 2008 at 05:17 AM

M Vers
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #6 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

mfurman wrote:
Thank you for those tests Yakim. How is Sigma's focusing when comparing with Canon?

x2. I'd also like to see a center crop comparison

Dec 13, 2008 at 05:28 AM

Yakim Peled
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #7 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

I had my share with inconsistent AF with the Sigma (sometimes BF, sometimes FF sometimes spot on) and next week I'm going to try calibrate it but regretfully I have to say that the Canon 50/4.1 and 50/1.8 were no better in this regard.

My normal way of shooting is using AF and Av and in the initial tests I was using that but as they progressed I saw that I'm getting inconsistent AF (and inconsistent aperture) so I switched to MF and M. I was also doing some normal shooting a bit (I mean, with all three) and my impression was that in normal shooting the Sigma has a slightly higher percentage of inconsistent AF. Alas, the problem was evident in one my WA attempt as well.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/710554

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Dec 13, 2008 at 06:17 AM

Yakim Peled
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #8 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

BTW, in these initial tests I was comparing the Sigma to the Canon 50/1.4 WRT flare (at that time I didn't think about adding the 50/1.8 and 17-55 to the test). Again, the Sigma trumps easily. With the sun in the frame it has none of those ugly flare spots which characterize the Canon.

BTW, from former experience with my 17-55 and 50/1.8 I can say that they are as worse (17-55) or even much worse (50/1.8).

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

2012 © Yakim Peled

Dec 13, 2008 at 06:48 AM

Yakim Peled
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #9 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

AF speed is also the fastest of the three. I did another test in very low light (ISO 3200, f/1.4, 1/45). I manually focused all to MFD, used the outer right AF point (i.e. non-high precision AF point) and didn't use AF assist. I then aimed to a sign post ~10m away and pressed the shutter button. I had no stopwatch with me but my estimation is as follows: Canon 35/1.4 – About 1 sec. Sigma 50/1.4 – About 1.2 sec. Canon 50/1.4 – About 2 sec. Canon 50/1.8 – About 3 sec. The 17-55 did not focus at all. Didn't even try…..

Summary: The Sigma is simply incredible piece of glass in all parameters of IQ where it trumps the others by either huge margin (bokeh), or big margin (flare), or small margin (CA). It also has the best BQ and best AF speed of all. No wonder that it is the most expensive.

Now, if I could just get it calibrated so AF accuracy will improve….

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Dec 13, 2008 at 06:56 AM

JunRay707
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #10 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

Also Sigma 50.4(maybe..45mm) is more wider than canon 50.4, 50.8.
I have seen before form Korean testers.

Dec 13, 2008 at 02:54 PM

Ernie Aubert
Online
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #11 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

David:

I got a Sigma 50 f1.4 a couple weeks ago, and it back focuses (on my 40D) very significantly at the only longer distance I've tried so far, about 50-60 feet. The plane at which the focus point is placed isn't within the DOF until about f5.6 or so. I'm hoping Sigma can adjust it if I send both the camera and lens to them.

But what a stunning lens! It's magnificent.

Dec 13, 2008 at 03:08 PM

Yakim Peled
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #12 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

JunRay707 wrote:
Also Sigma 50.4(maybe..45mm) is more wider than canon 50.4, 50.8.
I have seen before form Korean testers.

Indeed it is not impossible but I think it is more likely to assume that one lens show it than 3 lenses, and in the exact same amount.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Dec 13, 2008 at 05:45 PM

abqnmusa
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #13 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

The 2 Canon EF 50mm F1.4's I have tried were poor quality from F1.4 to F2.2
- halos
- CA
- washed out
- less then sharp

My Sigma 50mm F1.4 does not have those issues.

Dec 13, 2008 at 06:34 PM

crazeazn
Online
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #14 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

i think the 17-55 is the sleeper here. but all seem to be very good. great job yakim!

Dec 13, 2008 at 07:46 PM

hhski
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #15 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

There is no doubt that the sigma is an excellent lens optically. The question concern is how is it it the real world. I have read that the sigma also suffers from focus shift as the 50L does but to a lesser degree. My concern is the achilles for all sigmas when on a Canon AF. I do not like to use MF the color contrast of the Sigma appeals to me but my 50 1.4 works too well for me FF and the 35L gives me that FL on my cropped bodies. I had a survey about these lenses @ 2-3 wks ago. Welcome thread.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/712976/0#6435921

Dec 14, 2008 at 01:19 AM

simon_says
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #16 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

Wow, the bokeh on the Sigma is so much nicer!!! I really love the smooth quality!

Dec 14, 2008 at 02:37 AM

Yakim Peled
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #17 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

crazeazn wrote:
i think the 17-55 is the sleeper here. but all seem to be very good. great job yakim!

A sleeper? I traded 24-105 for it and am selling 35/1.4 because it was made redundant. It (alongside the 10-22) are the lenses which made me decide that no matter what my other body will be, it will accompany an EF-S body, not replace it.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Dec 14, 2008 at 09:05 AM

Badtz
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #18 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

Thanks for this thread. I'm looking at replacing some stolen gear, and Im thinking really hard about the sigma 50 and a 5d. Sigmas 30 served me very well as a constant companion on my 30d, I'm hoping (with a trip or 3 to sigma if need be) that I will like the 50 as much.

Dec 14, 2008 at 04:25 PM

Yakim Peled
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #19 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

AF update: I calibrated the lens today. It had serious FF. Now it is spot on, but alas, only when using the central AF sensor. When using the peripheral AF sensors at close range (under 3m) at f/1.4 or f/2.0 you still see a slight FF, though much less than before. According to the technician, Sigma's orders are to calibrate any lens only with the central AF sensor. When he looked at the peripheral AF sensors it was only at my specific request (I use them a lot). He suggested I contact Sigma Japan and that's what I'll do but so far, things look much better than before. I'll be doing some normal shooting (I don't really like testing) with it and see how it goes.

P.S. He insisted that calibrating a Sigma lens is only to a specific body. When I asked what happens if I have 2 or more bodies he said that it's impossible to make a perfect calibration for more than one body. When I asked what about Canon lenses he replied that it's a very different issue altogether as Sigma, by reverse engineering, is never able to achieve the same precision as Canon or Nikon. Depressing.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Dec 15, 2008 at 10:34 AM

Pixel Perfect
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #20 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

Anyone still want to claim the 50 f/1.8 has better bokeh than the 50 f/1.4? The bokeh of the 50 f/1.4 is poor, but the 50 f/1.8 is appalling. Some on the alternate gear forum were complaining the Sigma bokeh was too smooth and lack character!

Dec 15, 2008 at 01:58 PM

Yakim Peled
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #21 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

Pixel Perfect wrote:
Anyone still want to claim the 50 f/1.8 has better bokeh than the 50 f/1.4?

I don't recall anyone ever claimed that.

Pixel Perfect wrote:
Some on the alternate gear forum were complaining the Sigma bokeh was too smooth and lack character!

But now that you mention it, the bokeh of the 50/1.8 indeed has a lot of character. I recall haveing a mirror lens. Its bokeh had even more character.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Dec 15, 2008 at 02:03 PM

CKrueger
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #22 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

Wonderful tests, Yakim. Thanks a lot for posting these, along with your finding on AF.

I'm particularly impressed by its flare handling. I like shooting with the sun in/near the frame as an effect, and the Sigma blows the Canon out of the water, not just in flare spots, but overall when the sun is wreaking havoc inside the lens. (BTW, I like the flare photo as a photo... nice warm colors.)

Have you noticed a difference in CA shooting, say, trees against a sky?

Before I sold my 5D I was very tempted to buy an 85/1.2. Only the price stopped me. Now with my 40D I can't think of a good excuse not to buy this Sigma. Perhaps I can convince myself it's too heavy.

Dec 15, 2008 at 04:32 PM

pawlowski6132
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #23 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

deeprblue wrote:
Your 50 f1.8 seems misfocused on the last shot. It shouldn't be that soft at f2.8.

I thought the same thing. My 50 1.8 seems to be able to produce VERY sharp images at that aperture.

Dec 15, 2008 at 05:35 PM

Gil_W
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #24 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

For someone who states they are not a lens tester you have done a great job here Yakim. Thanks much. I agree with others that the Sigma has very nice bokeh and it is tempting to get one. After your positive testing on the lens I suspect there will be a run on the Sigmas at B&H and other places

Gil

Dec 15, 2008 at 06:06 PM

mh2000
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #25 · Sigma 50/1.4 vs. Canon's 50/1.4. 50/1.8 and 17-55/2.8 IS

a test is a test and nothing more, period. In my *actual* photos my 50/1.8 has produced more images that are more pleasing to my eye than my 50/1.4. Granted I am only looking at actual photos and not extreme crops from closeups of soda cans... if that is what you shoot, great, I guess you can "call it" based on this test, otherwise you have to use both lenses extensively before you can say anything... and even then it only comes down to your own photos. Neither lens is a "bokeh star," and both can be used to make excellent photos.

I just posted this in another thread, but I don't think it looks "appalling." (50/1.8 II, f1.8, handheld @ 1/30th, film):

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Pixel Perfect wrote:
Anyone still want to claim the 50 f/1.8 has better bokeh than the 50 f/1.4? The bokeh of the 50 f/1.4 is poor, but the 50 f/1.8 is appalling. Some on the alternate gear forum were complaining the Sigma bokeh was too smooth and lack character!

Dec 15, 2008 at 07:49 PM


FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 … 7 8 end