Just got my Sig 50 tonight.



I think this is my first photo post on fredmiranda.

How does yours shoot beyond 3m?

I don't know. I just got it last night and only took around ~20 photos.

I think I'm in love with the look this lens produces though. The focusing issues are only with autofocus, right? If I had to only use this lens on manual focus, I think I'd be fine with that.

Future Man wrote:
If I had to only use this lens on manual focus, I think I'd be fine with that.

I've said exactly the same thing. I don't complain about MF when I use Leica glass. The only difference is that the Sigma is clearly sharper and creamier.

(Note to Leica mob: I did not say "better.")

(Note to Sigma mob: I haven't had to use the Sigmalux as an MF lens, since AF works just fine for me.)

trumpet_guy wrote:
But note that the Canon 50/1.4 here is very nearly as good and note also
that the Canon is a little bit longer in focal length.


The canon shot has a lot more purple junk around the white lettering. I don't think it comes close to the Sigma.

Hope this is OK to do--I'm thinking about trading my Sigmalux. This seems like the audience who'd have something interesting to trade.

Just got mine about a week ago. Nice lens...focus is spot on, and it's surprisingly sharp wide open. CA is also very well controlled. On my 1Ds, this thing will focus in almost total darkness without AF assist . Great little lens...it's definetly a keeper.

Wich one have the nicest creamy bokeh of the new nikon 50mm 1,4 and the sima 1,4?

jlw82 wrote:
Wich one have the nicest creamy bokeh of the new nikon 50mm 1,4 and the sima 1,4?

Sigma, by a longshot. The new Nikon 50 has the least creamy bokeh of the 4 current f1.4 options in the 50-58mm range (It is much better than the old 50/1.4D though).

who came up with goofy minsomer 'sigmalux'? That's an insult to the lenses with -lux in their name that actually deserve it. ;-)

Ed Sawyer wrote:
who came up with goofy minsomer 'sigmalux'? That's an insult to the lenses with -lux in their name that actually deserve it. ;-)



That would be me. And I regret selling my Sigmalux. I will probably buy another Sigmalux in the near future.

Based on my experiences with sigma in the past, Sigmasux is the only moniker I could give their lenses. (Granted I haven't tried their 50/1.4 but I have no desire to really.)

-Ed

I've had a few aftermarket lenses in my time. Most have been pretty lousy, and I've learned to go with Canon (or Pentax, or whatever the camera is supposed to use) when possible. I suggest you try out the Sigmalux before you bash it. It's not like other aftermarket lenses. (Neither is their 500mm f/4.5, but that's a slightly different lens.)

Ed Sawyer wrote:
Based on my experiences with sigma in the past, Sigmasux is the only moniker I could give their lenses. (Granted I haven't tried their 50/1.4 but I have no desire to really.)

-Ed


Ed, it´s an amazing lens. Try it out

Ed Sawyer wrote:
Based on my experiences with sigma in the past, Sigmasux is the only moniker I could give their lenses. (Granted I haven't tried their 50/1.4 but I have no desire to really.)

-Ed


I had a lot of bad experiences with western women before meeting my (non-western) wife, but that doesn't mean all western women are evil. (Does it?)

Joking aside, everything I have seen and heard about the Sigma 50/1.4 tells me the moniker is appropriate. And no, I don't really like Sigmas much either, based on the ones I have owned.

I just bought one too. The Nikkor G was very nice, but since I shoot mainly wide open, I wanted to try something that gives better bokeh at large apertures. The Nikkor was good for being of the usual double gauss design, but the Sigma is waaaaaaaaaay better. I was a bit afraid that it would be just as harsh at larger distances (since most bokeh test are done at short distances), but it isn't.
This is the first lens I've tried (aside the Nikkor 28/2.8 AIS) that gives "medium format quality" of the OOF background. It looks like you've shot at f/2.8 when it is f/1.4!
The detail sharpness is lower than with the Nikkor, but it "handles" contrast in a way that makes the pictures look sharper allover.
Drawbacks? Well, it is very bulky, but not too heavy on the D700. I intend to buy a Voigtländer 40/2 for when I want a smaller combo.

Edit: And the vignetting! The Nikkor vignettes alot at f/1.4, but the Sigma doesn't.

I have had 4-5 sigmas now, have liked them all think i'll exchange my nikon 50 1.4 for å sigma somewhere down the road!

Maybe I'll give it a try someday. Perhaps they (Sigma) have changed their ways some in recent years. Admittedly the images do look good.

-Ed

I bought my sigma a few months ago and after recalibrating the 450D by Canon (yes, the camera not the sigma) I'm enjoying the "Sigmalux" every shot.

According to diglloyd's review of the Sigma 50/1.4 on the for-fee portion of his site, the Sigma suffers from focus shift to almost exactly the same extent as the Canon 50/1.2. diglloyd provides focus test chart images for both the Sigma and the Canon (as well as other fast primes) that clearly demonstrate this. Given the outcry against the Canon 50/1.2 for its focus shift, I'm surprised there isn't a similar cry against the Sigma 50/1.4. Have any of you Sigma 50/1.4 users noticed focus shift with your lens?

Galibier wrote:
According to diglloyd's review of the Sigma 50/1.4 (...) I'm surprised there isn't a similar cry against the Sigma 50/1.4. Have any of you Sigma 50/1.4 users noticed focus shift with your lens?

I have owned both the lenses mentioned and I have tested them carefully. The 50L has a terrible focus shift where the original focus plane isn't covered by the DOF when stopping down. The Sigma 50/1.4 EX also has a focus shift. The difference to the 50L is thatthe Sigma focus shift is much less dramatic and that the focal plane (as dialed in with the lens wide open) is covered by the DOF.

The focusing problems with the SIgma seems to vary from one copy of the lens to another and the lens may front or backfocus differently depending on the shooting distance. That's enough to cry against. The focus shift is small and not a problem with the Sigma.

I tried to check what this digllouyd saud about it but the site asked for a password when clicking on the Sigma 50 EX-article. Did he get worse results than these:

If a lens focus shifts like the 50mm L lens, why can't Canon program this shift into its AF algorithm? In other words, adjust the focus according to the aperture chosen?

Robert

Jonas B -- diglloyd's images showed the Sigma's focus shift to be only slightly less than the Canon's, but with both the DOF only barely covered the intended point of focus. So yes, his results showed greater focus shift than yours.

robsteve -- you raise a good question. I know of no reason why AF algorithms could not compensate for focus shift; after all, lenses already pass aperture and subject distance information to the camera. Reportedly, Ricoh was able to adjust AF to compensate for focus shift many years ago. Why not Canon (and Sigma) now?

Galibier wrote:
Jonas B -- diglloyd's images showed the Sigma's focus shift to be only slightly less than the Canon's, but with both the DOF only barely covered the intended point of focus. So yes, his results showed greater focus shift than yours.

Then there are sample differences. I didn't expect that.

As I had owned the 50L for some time when buying the Sigma I was well aware of the focusing shift problems and I carefully tried the Sigma for this. It was way better than the 50L in every test I run with regards to focus shift.

I run into focusing problems though, just as most other people. Visiting Sigma having the lens calibrated didn't do much (not for the 450D and also not for the 5D at a second visit).

(Just to make sure in case anyone wonder:
The three images I posted were of course focused once (manually with Live View) and then I didn't touch the lens. They were also the worst samples I got. For example, when shooting the USAF charts resolution increased just as one can expect it to do when stopping down.)

regards, /Jonas

Jonas, try having Canon calibrate your camera to their in house reference lens. It turned out the problem for me was the camera, not the lens. The Canon repair guy acknowledged that my camera was completely misaligned, leaving the focus point way out.