Thanks Mark to share your insight on this lens, sorry I once more have to leave a critical comment about it

These are not bokeh samples, these are OOF blur disc samples, it doesnt tell a lot about the quality of the bokeh, maybe it tells something about the character of the bokeh though. Curvature of field may just be too different to any other lenses to compare them the way you have done it.

I believe that the reason some lenses do not fully correct CA wide open, is that you have shaped OOF discs and not the IMO boring blobs of the Sigma. Again some people may like it others dont and it is certainly a lens with some appeal to people who want to replace the Canon 1.4

What's wrong with the bokeh of the Siggy?

cogitech wrote:
I prefer the Sigma bokeh. It is all so subjective, I suppose.

agreed. I suppose it depends on what "look" you are going for, but I like buttery backgrounds

It's amusing that for years around here we've heard people complain about the busy bokeh of Canon lenses and rave about the smooth bokeh of other makes of lenses. Now that Sigma seems to have put out a lens with smooth bokeh, some complain that its bokeh is not busy enough.

Perhaps Sigma needs to launch a luxury brand, ala Lexus.

CKrueger wrote:
It's amusing that for years around here we've heard people complain about the busy bokeh of Canon lenses and rave about the smooth bokeh of other makes of lenses. Now that Sigma seems to have put out a lens with smooth bokeh, some complain that its bokeh is not busy enough.

Perhaps Sigma needs to launch a luxury brand, ala Lexus.

You missed the point.
we have no idea how the full image looks like, where the focus sits, how much the blobs are out of focus, the distance to the background, the scale of the image

I think the sigmas's bokeh looks best.
JJ

Andi Dietrich wrote:
You missed the point.
we have no idea how the full image looks like, where the focus sits, how much the blobs are out of focus, the distance to the background, the scale of the image.

The point is that all four lenses were placed under identical conditions; the comparative difference is the point.

I'm not sure that posting the full frame will tell you anything more meaningful than the crops, but here it is anyway: the Sigma at f4. Distance to focal plane (subject centre frame) was about 1m. Distance to bokeh samples ranged from about 15cm to 1.5m. As stated previously, all these are background rather than foreground samples.

From what i can see, I am linking this Sigma very much. I am probably going to get one to have a play with, as i have no AF 50 at the moment.

Mark: Have you got a sample as above but at F1.4? Just want to see what it is like.

FranchiseJuan wrote:
Mark: Have you got a sample as above but at F1.4? Just want to see what it is like.

looking very very promising to me! thanks!

Andi Dietrich wrote:
Does the EXIF allow lens corrections in DPP? This may be a possibility if Sigma adapter the same settings of the EF50mm


I just got my Sigma 50 tonight. Yes, it allows lens corrections in DPP.
I'm not sure how relevant this is, since the geometric distortion is very
well controlled on this lens, and I haven't seen much CA with it.
I also noticed that Peripheral Illumination correction vastly over-corrected
the vignetting, if I used the standard amount (100).

Tim

I'm posting some shots taken with the Sigma 50/1.4 on a 30D.
Shots processed in DPP with default constrast and sharpness (0 and 3,
respectively) in "Standard" picture style. The white balance was either
"Daylight" or "Shade". These shots were taken in the evening. The light
varies from fairly bright, golden hour light, to shaded and dim.

The resizing was with Photoshop Elements using Bicubic and subsequently
Unsharp Mask (125%, 0.3, 0). Crops are 100% crops from the 8-bit TIFF files
out of DPP, with no further processing in Photoshop.

All shots are wide open, f/1.4, except the last pair, as indicated.



Edited by trumpet_guy on Jul 02, 2008 at 02:44 AM GMT

....continued.....

---continued----

That Sigma's bokeh looks gorgeous! Any comparisons with the Canon 50's?

Same tree, but at f/2

trumpet_guy wrote:
I'm posting some shots taken with the Sigma 50/1.4 on a 30D.(...)


Thank you for the images. The lens look very promising. What's your first impression with regards to AF? Silent, slow, missing or fast and nailing?

Fast, quiet, generally accurate. I'm getting about the same AF accuracy with
the Siggy on my 30D that I get with Canon lenses on this body: which is to say
good, but not perfect. When it misses, it generally front-focuses a little, but I
think this is as much the body's fault as anything. This lens seems about as
accurate in AF as my EF 100 f/2.

The build quality is very nice on this Sigma. When focusing from minimum
distance out to long distance, it is smooth and pretty fast, with a really nice
quality feel to the focus motor. There is fairly heavy glass to move, and the
HSM is up to the task. When focusing over a smaller range, around 8 to 10 meters
out, you can sometimes feel a little clunk in the mechanism, as it is moving and
stopping very quickly.

Overall, the lens feels very much like a slightly larger Sigma 30/1.4

I think they have optimized this lens for bokeh and uniformity across the full frame.
Distortion is minimal. Straight lines look straight. No visible vignetting on 1.6x crop
body -- even wide open. Colors are fantastic.

It is still possible to get low contrast with the lens, when shot in dim, soft light,
but I think it's still better wide open than the EF 50/1.4 or the CZ 50/1.4 Planar.

Tim


Edited by trumpet_guy on Jul 02, 2008 at 02:46 AM GMT

Some more, wide open.
It shows a little of that low-constrast Canon EF 50/1.4 look here:

> I think the sigmas's bokeh looks best.

The bokeh question is a matter of taste, and I am well aware that few share my bad taste. I like my bokeh to look more interesting than this lens makes it. Whether smooth, Leica-style bokeh kills 3D effect or not, I don't know, but I don't think it's impossible that there is a connection between sharp edged image circles, extended depth of field, 3D effect, and edge sharpness.

In hubsands sample of the tassle thingy hanging off the table, all the lenses draw a beautiful mysterious object which clearly has a pattern of strong points of light in it. On the Sigma it's just mush, so the lens is telling me less about the scene.

I would be interested to see if this lens can produce the kind of interesting edge effects that Lotus gets on his ZF100 f2:

Some more from the Sigma 50/1.4, wide open:

One more set, then I'm done bombarding this thread.

Wide open:

Leaves, with crop:

Don't get me wrong - it's clearly a lovely lens.

By chance I just came across a brilliant example by wee of what I like about the ZF 100 bokeh, which illustrates, I think, how hard edged bokeh can still be pretty:

Ariel Bravy wrote:
That Sigma's bokeh looks gorgeous! Any comparisons with the Canon 50's?

Not yet, but I hope to compare them this long weekend.

Richard,

Yeah, I like that bokeh as well. There's room for both kinds in a kit.

Wee, Nice exposure on that shot!