 |
|
|
Photonic
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 602
|
|
Review Date: Jan 23, 2009
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $429.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Very nice bokeh
|
|
Cons:
|
Not as sharp as I had expected
|
|
|
I will admit I had rather high expectations of this lens after reading many glowing reviews. I currently own a Canon 50mm 1.4 and was expecting the Sigma to provide slightly improved sharpness, better bokeh, and quiet/fast autofocusing.
After a week with the lens on both a 50D and 5DM2 I have elected to return it.
As far as bokeh and the HSM focus go I was very happy. Bokeh in particular is quite pleasing to my eye compared to the Canon. The HSM is both quick and very quite (I am distinctly bothered by the Canon motor noise).
As far as sharpness goes, however, I found the Canon to be better. I tested on the 5DM2 using LV and 10x mag (pure test of optics taking autofocus accuracy out of the equation) and found the Canon to have better resolution and contrast. I also noticed that the focal length on the Sigma was noticeably shorter.
I own a Sigma 150mm macro which is so sharp it is scary. I have a 120-300/2.8 that is every bit as good as the Canon 300/2.8 IS it replaced and I also have the 300-800mm which is a fantastic lens. I was totally prepared to fall in love with the 50mm Sigma, but it did not stand up to my Canon which is less expensive and less bulky.
Perhaps this was a less than stellar copy, but I don't have the time or patience to do Sigma's quality control for them.
|
|
 Jan 23, 2009
|
|
johansec
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 12, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 36
|
|
Review Date: Jan 15, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $440.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Well built, sharp, fast focus, great bokeh and color
|
|
Cons:
|
A bit pricey for 50mm 1.4
|
|
|
I have had this lens for several weeks now. I have used it at a wedding (as the wedding photographer), at a model studio shoot and at a couple of events. It is very solid and well constructed. It is sharp at 1.4 and the color and bokeh are very good. I have not seen any problems with CA or fringing so far. The focus seems fast and right on. I have not experienced any problems with front or back focusing with my copy although the very narrow dof at 1.4 does take some getting used to. Maybe it is the fascination of a new toy, but I can't get enough of this lens and it is destined to become a favorite and I can seeing myself reaching for this lens over my 24-70 2.8L when the 50mm focal range will do. If you get a good copy, I highly recommend it.
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2009
|
|
mmorozov
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 13, 2009
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jan 13, 2009
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $425.00
| Rating: 4
|
|
Pros:
|
Good build
|
|
Cons:
|
Focusing problems, fringing
|
|
|
I have a long history shooting with Canon EF 50 F1.4. I mostly use it for concerts, when I am close to the stage. When I purchased Sigma I was looking for better focus accuracy and better sharpness/contrast wide-open (as per glamorous review on DPReview).
The copy that I bought was back-focusing heavily. I had to set micro-adjustment value to +12, but I still wasn't quite pleased with the result. So I sent the lens to Sigma and they calibrated it. The focus problem is gone, but other problems remain:
1. My Canon 50mm has better sharpness in the center (I don't care about corner sharpness - it is bokeh most of the time)
2. There is no advantage in focus accuracy. Both lens miss focus at the same rate. I would actually say that Canon performed marginally better. I get more keepers with Canon.
3. Bokeh is better than Canon's, but the green-purple fringing in out-of-focus area is really evident and looks quite ugly to me. The pictures have this purple haze in the bokeh which changes the tone of the whole photo. I don't like it at all.
In essence, the increase in size and weight is not justified by any performance improvement. The lens has a distinct character that I don't like. The lens may look good on the charts and test patterns, but in real life it is rather disappointing.
I took some test pictures of the same subjects with both Canon and Sigma, changing them randomly. After that I looked at all pictures without knowing which one was taken with which lens. In this "blind" test, both me and my friend would choose Canon over Sigma every single time. There is simply no edge in Sigma whatsoever even after calibration.
It goes on Craigslist tonight.
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2009
|
|
Matt Kerby
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Jun 9, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 497
|
|
Review Date: Jan 13, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fairly sharp wide open, CA is light compared to other 50's, Build is nice. Af is consistant, bokeh is out of this world
|
|
Cons:
|
Mine front focuses, but with a microadjustment of +10 on my 5Dmk2 it's perfect so no worries.
|
|
|
So far the best 50mm AF lens for Canon I've found. I find the AF more consistant than the L and the EF 50/1.4.
It is pretty sharp wide open...or sharp enough, about the same as my EF50/1.4 which was pretty good.
The AF isn't super fast but not too slow either, tracks my kids running around just fine.
What I love about it is the color, contrast and bokeh, very nice, very L like. I've had it a little over a week and have left it on my 5D2 where it will be my main walkaround.
If you have microadjust on your body, by all means get this rather than the L or EF 1.4.
I rated this a solid 10, because it's the best 50 I've used so far and 1/3 the price of the L
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2009
|
|
kimlwx
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 10, 2005
Location: Denmark
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jan 13, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Exceptional bokeh, build quality, IQ, silent AF
|
|
Cons:
|
Front focus at close focus
|
|
|
I bought this lens to replace the Canon 50/1.8 on my Canon 5D (mk. I).
First off, the build quality strikes me in being superior to my other Sigma EXs (24-70/2.8 + 70-200/2.8) which are also very good. This one stands out, though.
Being (a lot) heavier than the Canon 1.8 is really not a problem for me. Quite contrary, actually. The increased mass make the camera a lot more balanced.
The autofocus is silent and pretty fast, although (my copy, at least) sometime front focusses a bit when focusing around the near-focus limit.
Image quality - sharpness, color, and contrast - is excellent starting already at F/1.4.
The bokeh is out of this world; creamy and very, very smooth. Some may think it's "over the top", but I simply love the look of it.
Highly recommended piece of glass!
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2009
|
|
Greg Feldman
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Mar 14, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 5847
|
|
Review Date: Jan 6, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $440.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Background blur, build quality, sharpness
|
|
Cons:
|
Size, vignetting at f/1.4
|
|
My Canon 50mm f/1.8 is a very good lens--as long as you stop it down to f/2.8. So I decided to try the Sigmalux. (Yes, you may use that nickname. 
Background blur is simply astonishing. The only complaint I've heard about it is that it might be too smooth. It's most similar to that of my 135L, but I think it's noticeably better.
http://photo.gregafeldman.com/riley2/JP7K2145_pod_luna.jpg
http://photo.gregafeldman.com/riley2/JP7K1846_pod_close.jpg
Wide open:
http://photo.gregafeldman.com/riley2/JP7K1743_pod_close.jpg
I haven't had any issues with the AF--certainly not any more than I have with all AF lenses--but I've really used it only for closeups from f/1.4 to f/2.0, all on a 1.3x body.
It does vignette pretty heavily at f/1.4, but it's not really a problem.
If it were the size and weight of a normal 50mm lens, it would be just about perfect.
|
|
|
Jan 6, 2009
|
|
hhski
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 26, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 2313
|
|
Review Date: Jan 3, 2009
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $449.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Beautiful bokeh,color, contrast. AF consistancy seemed good.
|
|
Cons:
|
Noisy AF, objucts on right side of image OOF.
|
|
|
It felt great on my 5d2. The color contrast on my test images were great. My candid shots were great. It was the portraits when I stopped down to f5.6 where I noticed the problems with focus on the right side.I am returning this and buying the L. The hell with the extra cash.
|
|
|
Jan 3, 2009
|
|
c00kiem0nster
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 13, 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 154
|
|
Review Date: Jan 2, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
wonderfully sharp wide open, fast and reliable focus, excellent built quality, very controlled CAs
|
|
Cons:
|
none so far
|
|
|
i just received this lens as a christmas present and i have so far taken about 700 shots with it.
i am pretty much overwhelmed with the results. first of all i have not tried any other 50mm prime thus far so i cannot compare the results i've gotten.
but i am very satisfied. the wide open performance which kind of triggered my decision to go for this lens is excellent. very sharp, hardly any CAs (and if there are any, they can easily be corrected) and beautiful color rendering.
this lens has pretty much exceeded my exspectations.
i was a little worried when i put it on my wish list, given the focus issues some people seem to have with their lenses.
i do not think i have any focus problems. i did get some out of focus shots with this lens, but as most of my shots are very much in focus, i am pretty sure that they are just a result of me being not at all well versed in using a lens that fast.
and as i took more and more shots, the OOF problems practically vanished.
|
|
|
Jan 2, 2009
|
|
markgsfca
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 2, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 4
|
|
Review Date: Dec 30, 2008
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $446.00
| Rating: 4
|
|
Pros:
|
Nicely constructed - feels expensive and looks the part. Sharper than Canon 50mm F1.4, but only slightly.
|
|
Cons:
|
The worst CA I've ever seen. Thick green fringing around objects at F1.4 - F2.8. Not even close to my Canon 50mm F1.4 in this department.
|
|
|
To be honest I really wanted this lens to work for me. I shoot a lot at 50mm on my Canon 50D, and really was looking forward to sharper F1.4-F2.0 performance with the Sigma. Well.... what a disappointment. After all the good reviews here and at dpreview.com, I had high expectations. Compared to my Canon 50mm F1.4 it was slightly sharper under F2.0, but the green fringing, with occasional red fringing on some objects was unacceptable. Now I know most of you would say, oh just send it back for another one, but I'm sorry - that's not acceptable to me in this class of product. Back to the vendor it goes tomorrow.
|
|
|
Dec 30, 2008
|
|
Sayeret18
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Apr 1, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 598
|
|
Review Date: Dec 24, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Outstanding color, clarity, and bokeh. Mine focuses fine - a bit slower than the Canon 50 1.4, perhaps - but fine nonetheless. This lens appears to be very well made.
|
|
Cons:
|
Relatively large and expensive. The Canon 50 1.4 is more compact and more reasonably priced.
|
|
|
The Canon 50 f1.4 is a fine lens, IMO. It is compact, well-made, sharp, and my copy snaps into focus, even at f1.4. The Sigma is larger and at least 25% more expensive, possibly better constructed, at least as sharp, and my copy focused very well. Both render colors very well. However, the Sigma's bokeh is head and shoulders above the Canon. You can't go wrong with either lens, IMO, but the Sigma seems to be something special.
|
|
|
Dec 24, 2008
|
|
Larry Carter
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 7, 2002
Location: Georgia
Posts: 3739
|
|
Review Date: Dec 21, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very impressive lens. Better than my Canon 50 1.4 in build and optically pleasing and sharp. It is bigger than a normal 50 but I like it this way for a better feel. It's becoming one of my favorites and I can't seem to find any negatives.
|
|
Cons:
|
Pricey but worth it. I had to give it an 8 on price but you pay for what you get.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2008
|
|
awong
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Jun 21, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 75
|
|
Review Date: Dec 15, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $450.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, even wide open (Very impressive vs. the canon 50mm 1.4), quick focus for the most part, color is right on
|
|
Cons:
|
hunts a little bit in the dark when using outer AF points
|
|
|
The price almost kept me away from the lens but the quality after my first few times out with it keeps impressing me! I've never enjoyed the Sigma finish and the quickness you can see light marks so -1 for that. For the extra price, you get the hood and leather zip pouch which is an added bonus and their generous warranty as well.
I didn't have any real issues with this lens, just a little hunting in low light conditions while using the outer AF points in the aquarium and some night time shooting.
Overall, I'm very impressed with the lens and it was well worth the money... I took some full body shots... and was amazed at the clarity and detail that it picked up even on the smallest facial features
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2008
|
|
Rob Chisholm
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 15, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 282
|
|
Review Date: Dec 4, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
The lens draws very nicely. Color is accurate. Bokeh is soft without harsh outlines.
|
|
Cons:
|
Price compared to other 50 1.4's but it is built better than Canon's.
|
|
|
50 is a love it or hate it focal length. I tend to gravitate to the 50mm over the 85 for some reason. On my original 5D, the Canon 50 1.4 was the stable prime. On my 5D2, I debated whether to purchase a new Canon 50 1.4 (sold the old one), get the 50 1.2, or go with the sigma. I have previously owned a Sigma 30 1.4 on a cropped body and gotten some fantastic results. So, I decided to give the Sigma 50 a try; I like the look that Sigma primes render -- the bokeh tends to be smooth and they stay pretty sharp wide open, at least centrally.
The copy of the sigma I purchased is sharp centrally from 1.6 and up. A touch soft at 1.4 I have not yet tried the micro focus adjust on the cam. Hopefully this might improve the sharpness wide open. However, the images seem to sharpen up very well in post, and the out of focus rendering is wonderfully smooth, so I am very pleased. I like the look of this lens wide open over the Canon 1.2 at 1.4.
Build seems excellent.
Overall, very satisfied and would purchase a sigma 85 1.? prime if such a lens was released and had similar characteristics over purchasing the Canon 1.2. With Sigma, you seem to get a lot of lens for the money.
|
|
|
Dec 4, 2008
|
|
mahonet
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 30, 2008
Location: Finland
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Nov 30, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp even wide open and also with full sensor body. Autofocus of my copy is excellent.
|
|
Cons:
|
weight
|
|
|
A very good new prime lens by Sigma. I have read about inconsistency problems with it΄s autofocus, but my copy works really well!
Compared to canon 50 f1.4 I am very satisfied with this lens especially concerning it΄s ability to produce sharp and CA-free pictures in apertures f1.4-2.0. The bokeh compared to Canon eqv. is more beautiful. Compared to Canon 35 f 1.4 not as sharp wide open but otherwise nearly as good. Good forth of money, if you get a good copy.
|
|
|
Nov 30, 2008
|
|
abqnmusa
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: May 11, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1965
|
|
Review Date: Nov 24, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp wide open at F1.4 & stopped down, quick and reliable focus, good color and contrast in the images.
|
|
Cons:
|
a bit heavy, but not really a negative. The image quality is worth the extra weight.
|
|
|
I was never happy with the Canon EF 50mm F1.4. I found it next to useless from F1.4 to F2.2 due to lack of sharpness due to ghosting and flare.
The Sigma 50mm is quite a bit bigger and heavier but very well made. It is built like an L lens.
The image quality is excellent. The lens is sharp from F1.4 and stopped down. I do not have the problems with ghosting & flare the Canon 50 had. The focus has been fast and reliable.
Overall this has been an excellent purchase. I would recommend to others looking for a fast 50mm that support full frame.
|
|
|
Nov 24, 2008
|
|
agnius
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 10, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 69
|
|
Review Date: Nov 16, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, auto focus right on the money on Canon 5D, small (compared to 28-70 f2.8), bright
|
|
Cons:
|
Mount is tight - not as smooth mounting as with Canon lenses
|
|
I like photographing at night, especially on Halloween. I like going to the West Hollywood parade and take portraits of people there. First attempt was to put f1.0 lens on Canon 1n 10 years ago ended up in a disaster - camera would not focus in the dark. Then, following year, I rented a Leica M6 with a f1.4 50mm - I could focus, but not fast enough for moving targets, but it was possible to work with pre-focusing. Then, exposures were off as there was no metering automation in the camera. Later, I acquired Konica Hexar Silver. Hexar could focus in the dark, would take great pictures, and I thought I was set. Then came digital revolution... I was back to the square one. I wish there was a rangefinder type digital camera with IR autofocus system. The rumors of digital Hexar never came true. Maybe Nikon will have a rangefinder type system coming in the future? Well, this year I rented Canon f1.2 50mm for my 5D, and was quite surprised. That lens was way sharper than my beloved f2.8 28-70, but still focusing was a problem. Next year I plan on using flash with a lumisphere, that should give some reasonably nice light to the darkness shots. But I regress. Canon's 50mm made me think of adding another prime to my shooting kit (I have f2.8 20mm, which I never considered that highly, just passable). I considered Canon's f1.4 50mm, but based on reviews available decided to forgo because of halation reports wide open. Sigma was a new kid on a a block, with good potential. So I bit the bullet and ordered one. I am very pleased with the results. I feel like I just saved a bunch of money over f1.2 50mm from Canon. Works great with 5D! I also use 25mm extension ring for close up shots, I feel this lens is very nice for that too. Lens has a nice finish to it, non slippery sandblasted feel. Color saturation and contrast are good. There is flare if you shooting into the sun (I did not have the included hood on though). There is a shot at f1.4 at iso 800, 1/25th sec - http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3162/3035298268_b6b88a814b_b.jpg
Close up shot - http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3013/3034450611_8e97cbe31c_b.jpg
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
103
|
132645
|
Jan 23, 2013
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
80% of reviewers
|
$468.74
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.02
|
8.33
|
8.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
