itai195 wrote:
I'm still feeling like I'd prefer the CV 40 for the faster aperture, but I like this Sigma's rendering too and AF may be handy for my use case. Maybe the right answer is to get both...
The right answer at FredMiranda.com is always to get both.
Agreed. This lens looks awesome. Next time I buy an AF lens, this is the top contender. The Sammy looks good too, but dang.
Love to see some more real world samples from both, maybe a side-by-side comparison of how they look *on* the camera, too. I know it's superficial, but I really like the sexy retro thing this lens has.
*EDIT* Whoa, Lensrentals has it already? Maybe have to hit them up to try it out for myself!
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes no question the FE 50/1.4 ZA is the most special on this range. It's also a much faster lens capable of more blur for subject isolation and less noise in low light. I'm now curious to see how they compare at f/2.8 in rendering.
I have the feeling the Sigma 45/2.8 will have nicer rendering but the Sony will give that contrast punch to the subject.
Picked one up today. I actually thought they gave me the wrong lens when I took it out of the box. It is so small. Makes the 50mm 1.4 look like a zoom lens Sigma definitely could have made this slightly bigger and be an F2 lens No real time for testing tonight but shooting here in my office it seems pretty darn sharp in the center at 2.8. Will have to compare to the 1.4 tomorrow.
davidmathar wrote:
I own the little Sigma myself for a few days now. It renders quite beautifully, especially the out of focus rendering is quite gorgeous for a 2.8. One thing I noticed though, is the AF accuracy near the minimum focus distance. As Fred already mentioned, the lens shows quite some improvement in image quality when stopping down in this distance range. However, partly this seems a bit due to a small backfocus behavior with AF-C at these distances, at least with my sample. It would be great if you could quickly test this with your sample. Just compare manual/AF-S/AF-C shots at near minimum focus distances. Cheers ...Show more →
Thanks for sharing your focusing issues. I'm not getting consistent results in AF-C focus mode either. For me, it sometimes back focus, other times front focus and it also hits the target but accuracy depends on distance.
AF-S has been very consistent and rarely miss focus for me though.
No AF-C (and eye-AF with AF-C) is not accurate at least in typical portrait distances. Further away it seems more or less fine. I already contacted Sigma (Germany).
Someone asked me to do a rendering comparison to the FE 50/1.4 ZA.
I've tested them at the same distance so the FE 50/1.4@f/2.8 should have an advantage in blur since it's noticeably longer but the Sigma 45/2.8 wide open still has smoother rendering!
Resolution is not far behind from 2-3m but not as great from 1m to MFD. The Sony also has higher contrast at any distance.
Here are thumbs showing both resized images and their respective 1:1 crops showing area of focus and OOF rendering:
(All manual focused using the highest magnification. Best of 3 for each)
Comparison at 3m distance. (both lenses at f/2.8 - same distance) Sony 50/1.4 bottom, Sigma 45/2.8 top
1:1 crops comparing focused area. A bit more SA for the Sigma but not far behind in resolution and contrast
Thanks for your tests, Fred. I suppose that your earlier results at infinity suggest that closing the Sigma 45 mm down even to f/3.2 might increase the sharpness while perhaps still permitting rather smooth rendering. That would be nice.
zugzwang2 wrote:
Thanks for your tests, Fred. I suppose that your earlier results at infinity suggest that closing the Sigma 45 mm down even to f/3.2 might increase the sharpness while perhaps still permitting rather smooth rendering. That would be nice.
Yes and bokeh balls will remain round up to f/4.5.
Here is a portrait sample against the light.
Love the rendering but wish AF-C was more reliable.
Finally got to do alittle testing last night. Same results as Fred and others. AFC is inconsistent while AFS is very good. Very frustrating. The whole point of me buying this lens was a smaller family friendly option to the my 50mm 1.4. If I can't count on Eye AF then what's the point. Samyang 85 1.4 all over again. Loved the rendering but I'm not putting up with inconsistent AF in 2019. It's an easy thing to test. I just don't understand how these companies can release these lenses with these issues. One right after the other as well. Batis 40 then Samyang 85 now Sigma 45. Are they that incompetent in testing? Do they think most people are stupid or will not care? Just don't get it. Anyway will be returning today. Not sitting around waiting for firmware. It seems like the new normal is to use the public to find the flaws rather than in house testing. I'm not playing that game anymore. Just wish CV made AF versions of their lenses
nhsonyshooter wrote:
Finally got to do alittle testing last night. Same results as Fred and others. AFC is inconsistent while AFS is very good. Very frustrating. The whole point of me buying this lens was a smaller family friendly option to the my 50mm 1.4. If I can't count on Eye AF then what's the point. Samyang 85 1.4 all over again. Loved the rendering but I'm not putting up with inconsistent AF in 2019. It's an easy thing to test. I just don't understand how these companies can release these lenses with these issues. One right after the other as well. Batis 40 then Samyang 85 now Sigma 45. Are they that incompetent in testing? Do they think most people are stupid or will not care? Just don't get it. Anyway will be returning today. Not sitting around waiting for firmware. It seems like the new normal is to use the public to find the flaws rather than in house testing. I'm not playing that game anymore. Just wish CV made AF versions of their lenses...Show more →
My advice is to let Sigma know. The more users report the AF-C inconsistencies to them, the faster they may develop a firmware update.
genji wrote:
The right answer at FredMiranda.com is always to get both.
So true...
In this case, I've pulled the trigger on the CV40 finally (it only took 200 pages in the review thread to finally succumb), but I may pick up the Sigma someday if the AF-C issues can be sorted out.
Fred Miranda wrote:
My advice is to let Sigma know. The more users report the AF-C inconsistencies to them, the faster they may develop a firmware update.
Could you share the address you submitted your report to? Reusing that channel may be more effective than reporting via dealers.
No real time for testing tonight but shooting here in my office it seems pretty darn sharp in the center at 2.8. Will have to compare to the 1.4 tomorrow.
