One of my photography heroes is Tony Hoffer. He wrote a review of the Sigma 85 vs the Canon 85L. He states Writing this next sentence is like disowning a child…. The Sigma 85 1.4 is a better lens than the Canon 85L. There, I said it. It’s not ‘as good’, it’s actually better.http://hofferphotography.com/2010/11/16/my-sigma-85-f1-4-vs-canon-85l-review/
Tony is a giant monster photographer in my mind, he really knows how to group different prime lens to make killer shots. I won't doubt he and Amy might be the next Chrisman combo and nominated as one of the new top 10 in the future, which pushed me really hard to get married (I even didn't have gf now, sigh ~~~) as soon as possible to hire him before he doubled the price ~~~
silentwings wrote:
Tony is a giant monster photographer in my mind, he really knows how to group different prime lens to make killer shots. I won't doubt he and Amy might be the next Chrisman combo and nominated as one of the new top 10 in the future, which pushed me really hard to get married (I even didn't have gf now, sigh ~~~) as soon as possible to hire him before he doubled the price ~~~
I dont know what the tweeter was, but I do know that after a time with the sigma, it was not focusing accurately for him, and he was thinking of making a change
I plan to get rid of my 85 1.8 for one of these other 85 prime lenses too. Does anyone try ZE 85 1.4 before? And how does ZE 85 1.4 compare to Sigma 85 1.4 and 85 LII?
I still think the Sigma is a better lens than the 85L overall, but I have gone back to the 85L. My decision came down to the fact that Sigma's service takes longer than Canon CPS platinum and with the amount I use an 85 and the amount of times I use CPS it didn't make sense anymore. The Sigma focus would seem to struggle and was at times inexplicable. Better overall, but not as consistent.
Tony Hoffer wrote:
Wow, I need to hire silentwings to do our PR...
I still think the Sigma is a better lens than the 85L overall, but I have gone back to the 85L. My decision came down to the fact that Sigma's service takes longer than Canon CPS platinum and with the amount I use an 85 and the amount of times I use CPS it didn't make sense anymore. The Sigma focus would seem to struggle and was at times inexplicable. Better overall, but not as consistent.
as an aside... I think its important for all of us, as professionals to evaluate our gear not just on optics alone, but on the service of the given company and how it may affect our ability in the long term, to deliver consistency.
Well, Sigma has bit flaky AF kinda always with every brand of camera I ever tried it (means Nikon/Canon/Sony .. worst with Canon for some reason, best results with Sony). They have some lens that have pretty good optical quality, but maybe should be sold as Zeiss/Samyang. Manual focus with confirmation chip and auto-aperture.
Tho that would make from top Sigma lenses probably more niché market than it already is..
Tony Hoffer wrote:
Wow, I need to hire silentwings to do our PR...
I still think the Sigma is a better lens than the 85L overall, but I have gone back to the 85L. My decision came down to the fact that Sigma's service takes longer than Canon CPS platinum and with the amount I use an 85 and the amount of times I use CPS it didn't make sense anymore. The Sigma focus would seem to struggle and was at times inexplicable. Better overall, but not as consistent.
This inconsistency appears to be the Achilles Heel of the vast majority of Sigma products, cameras and flashes included. I've had my share of it and quite some time ago decided not to purchase or use any Sigma gear ever again. I've been tempted, believe me, to reverse that decision. But I can't find it in me to give them the benefit of the doubt. Plus, as another poster has said, in no way does Sigma service come close to CPS. I just had 2 Canon lenses shipped to CPS and then returned to me completely fixed and adjusted, all in a matter of 3 days.
I much prefer the signature of the Canon to the Sigmam when photographing people. Both are great lenses, with shortcomings. IMHO, you really need to have both in your hands, use them, then make your own decision.
I tried to form my own opinions on the Sigma 50mm 1.4 after reading sooooo many online negative reviews of focus issues. I purchased two separate Sigma 50 1/.4 lenses at different times, neither focused correctly with a 5D. Sold them both, and have been using a Canon 50/1.4 that always works correctly and never lets me down.
I currently own 5 Canon EF lenses, and other than the one I damaged, I have never had a single repair / problem with any of them. Sticking with Canon lenses based on reliability and consistency.
jolson72 wrote:
I tried to form my own opinions on the Sigma 50mm 1.4 after reading sooooo many online negative reviews of focus issues. I purchased two separate Sigma 50 1/.4 lenses at different times, neither focused correctly with a 5D. Sold them both, and have been using a Canon 50/1.4 that always works correctly and never lets me down.
I currently own 5 Canon EF lenses, and other than the one I damaged, I have never had a single repair / problem with any of them. Sticking with Canon lenses based on reliability and consistency.
Bummed to read that as I am thinking of finally retiring my mkI 50 1.8 with a Sigma 50 f1.4.
I have both the sigma 85 and 50. I will be sending them both in next week because the warranty is about to expire, but other than a little softness/miscalibration on the 50 (correctable with the 5dII), they both have been amazing for me
Tony Hoffer wrote:
Wow, I need to hire silentwings to do our PR...
I still think the Sigma is a better lens than the 85L overall, but I have gone back to the 85L. My decision came down to the fact that Sigma's service takes longer than Canon CPS platinum and with the amount I use an 85 and the amount of times I use CPS it didn't make sense anymore. The Sigma focus would seem to struggle and was at times inexplicable. Better overall, but not as consistent.
