Elisha82 wrote:
His lens seems to be front focussing quite a bit. You can see by the fact the the edge of the couch being more in focus than the child.
So you actually mean "back focusing" then, i.e., the actual focus point being behind the intended focus point, right? Or did I misunderstand what you said?
infosecgeek wrote:
Yeah it seems to be.. The dock won't be here until tomorrow, but yeah seems a bit off
Don't worry about the dock for now. Just try to tune it like any other lens using the camera MFA adjustment settings. You will only be limited to one MFA value (as opposed to different values for different distances which the dock would enable you to do). But you may see improvement even with a single value.
To me based on the angle he is shooting from, it seems to be front focussing.
It would be easier to determine if we could see a shot that's head on rather than what seems like a 45 degree angle to me!
The dock will help for sure. Just make sure you use the distance scale on the lens when you calibrate the 4 distances and not actually use a measuring tape.
You want the measuring point to be accurate according to the lenses distance measurement.
cambyses wrote:
So you actually mean "back focusing" then, i.e., the actual focus point being behind the intended focus point, right? Or did I misunderstand what you said?
I didnt' like the 1.4 compared to the 1.8 and the 1.8 was sharper on my copy and just great and lightweight. The 50mm is a lot heavier. I use my 35mm more than the 50mm.
I loved my 50 14.G and used it quite a bit for years. I never understood why it got such a bad rep. I found it sharp from 1.8 up and even 1.4 was pretty good. People say its slow but I never had an issue with it.
I did finally sell it a month ago because I picked up the 58 1.4G and didn't need them both.
I tried 50/1.4 ART on D750, both didn't focus accurately. The option would be to buy the dock, but it is kind of crazy to have to looks for hacks at this price level.
The 50/1.4G doesn't really shine on a D750, not as sharp as I want and lacks pop.
I haven't found a 50mm prime (which is my favorite focal length) for Nikon that I like, that's why I invested in Summilux 50/1.4 ASPH on a Sony A7II.
My 50 ART was significantly better than my 50 1.4G in every situation. It focuses faster, much sharper with more clarity, liked the color rendition better, and the bokeh is more pleasant.
I did, like many others, recently made the plunge to the 58 1.4G. It has its trade offs with the ART but will be keeping it instead and have put the ART in the sale forums. It's not as sharp and has some CA issues but the images look so surreal/artsy when taking pictures of people... Which is what I normally use a prime for.
patotts wrote:
I tried 50/1.4 ART on D750, both didn't focus accurately. The option would be to buy the dock, but it is kind of crazy to have to looks for hacks at this price level.
The dock isn't a hack. It's genius. I wish all lensmakers had this sort of thing. After using it for my two Art lenses (35mm and 50mm), buying a lens without the ability to fine tune the autofocus at multiple focus distances feels like buying old technology.
fetopher wrote:
The dock isn't a hack. It's genius. I wish all lensmakers had this sort of thing. After using it for my two Art lenses (35mm and 50mm), buying a lens without the ability to fine tune the autofocus at multiple focus distances feels like buying old technology.
Doesn't exist only because Sigma reverse-engineers the communication between lens and body. Nikon is infamous that have a pantened that (which is set to expired fairly soon), ergo Sigma needs the dock to tune for accuracy as new bodies come out.
patotts wrote:
Doesn't exist only because Sigma reverse-engineers the communication between lens and body. Nikon is infamous that have a pantened that (which is set to expired fairly soon), ergo Sigma needs the dock to tune for accuracy as new bodies come out.
Whatever the reason for its creation, once you've used it, you'll wish your other lenses could be so technically perfect. Obviously, a perfectly fine-tuned lens does not a great photographer make, but why not have focus as dialed in as possible at multiple focus distances? If a good photo needs 20 variables going right, I can be sure one variable, focus accuracy at any distance, is removed from the equation when I'm shooting a Sigma Art lens.
I completely get your point, I want my gear to be as good as possible. In general though, I want the gear we are paying lots of money for to work perfectly out of the box.
patotts wrote:
I completely get your point, I want my gear to be as good as possible. In general though, I want the gear we are paying lots of money for to work perfectly out of the box.
I hear ya, but I don't think it's reasonable to expect lenses to require no fine tuning out of the box, regardless of brand. As bodies are higher and higher resolution, the demands on lenses is more and more. I own a half dozen Nikon lenses and 3-4 "off brand" lenses. All require AF fine tuning for optimal performance on my D810.
Do you typically fine tune your lenses? With something that helps measure, like FoCal? Do all your lenses land on "0" fine tuning needed? At all focus distances?!? Even my Nikon lenses that require the least amount of fine tuning still show variance at various focus distances.
The benefit of Sigma's approach is, unlike all of my Nikon lenses, I don't need to compromise and pick one focus distance to tune to. With the Sigma dock, I can be "perfect" at all focus distances. Like I said a few posts ago, brilliant!
"I've heard others state that only Sigma lenses need such a device. I'll meet them part way: I think there is probably a more frequent need for such adjustment on third-party lenses, but I can absolutely guarantee you that the big-boy's lenses do indeed have this same kind of problem, at least occasionally."
I hope this helps, and I hope you fine tune your lenses--Sigma, Nikon or otherwise. It makes a world of difference.
Holy Grail, who the hell posted those shots, he/she owes me a share of the money it will take to get the 50 Art!!!
Kidding apart, I own the 50/1.4D and used to love it on my DX body (a wonderful Fuji S5Pro), on FF I rather prefer the 85 (and I do just love it in its 1.8G incarnation which is the only one I can afford) but I am going through mental mas***bation if I should get the 50 Art and how much would it improve over my old Nikon; I don't mind bulk and weight, I would save buying filters cos I already have an expensive B+W polarizer (a good excuse uh!?).
From some samples seen online it looks like a stunning lens but am sure those shots were performed by very good photographers which is not my case so, 50D vs 50A in amateur hands would make a big difference?
