rico wrote:
It's a shame this Sigma has focus problems similar to the Canon EF 50/1.2L (a real letdown). I continue to limp along with the EF 50/1.4 - lumpy construction, lousy bokeh, lifeless @ f/1.4. Next up for us fans of the fast 50 is Nikon's AF-S redesign. My fingers are crossed...
You're jumping into conclusions... This 50mm Sigma seems to have problems with a couple of 5D bodies. On my 400D the Sigma works flawless and produces great image quality.
I have now had Canon adjust my 5D to factory specs, using their own in house ref lens (whatever that is).
The Sigma went from completely out at mostly any distance to display spot-on focus at every distance.
I realized this possibility when suddenly my 85L was as out as the Sigma. I havent used the 85L much the last couple of years, since I started shooting with alts.
I will post more on this later, including test images, to show what happened. It is quite amazing how way out my 5D was, even the technician was somewhat surprised by it. I wonder if all my alt lens use could be to blame for this.
My 1006xxx Sigma is now a complete babe on my 5D
EDIT: That is, under less ecstatic scrutinization, it now front focuses a bit. I will turn the lens in at the Sigma dealer tomorrow and have it adjusted. Then, I think it should all be great...
Even my 50 macro was noticably out of focus before turning in the camera. I am afraid all this old lens stuff have some negative consequences for the modern high tech equipment we have. Or it could just be the mirror banging into the rear of my precious Rokkor a couple of times too many....
Focus seems right on the money! Definitely need your focus target to stand out against the background though, initially I put the target on a cinder block seam and the AF picked up the seam instead of the target.
Note the purple fringing before focus plane and green after, to be expected I suppose with CA of about 1/3 pixel. Very nice lens though, well-built and solid, good match for the 1Ds2. Just need to check out the bokeh now!
A bokeh shot, DON'T get hung up on the laser leveler sharpness - this was shot in gusty 40mph Santa Ana winds. The laser leveler was moving, the camera was moving, etc.
But the bokeh doesn't care about wind, and IMHO it's pretty darn smooth. Two thumbs up.
In case you were wondering this is a parking lot with some cars in the background (back of pickup truck on right), a residential area behind with foliage, and brown grassy hills about four miles in the distance. Setting sun and long shadows for lighting. You can't even see all of the power and telephone lines crossing the blue sky, but there are lots of them. Poof, they're gone. I think I'm going to enjoy this lens.
Wide-open on 40D, in camera JPEG, focus roughly on tip of nose, quite backlit, some movement possible (this kitten is a maniac and never stops moving).
Lovely diffuse blur in the background, quite a bit of purple fringing though, but to be expected on a large aperture 50 (except the Summilux-M 50 1:1.4 which is apochromatic).
The performance at near MFD is not as good as it is further away. This lens is great for portraits and I love the bokeh.
thrice wrote:
ugh I guess cos this thread is really long no one bothers to read the earlier posts but this much has been established:
1. The issue is back focusing when focusing beyond 10' on full frame bodies
2. Many copies focus perfectly on crop frame bodies
3. The more common issue (if there is one) on crop bodies is front focusing
4. Calibration is NOT the issue - calibrated full frame bodies matched to calibrated sigma 50/1.4's get the same issue. It is not correctable with lens profiles in mark III bodies.
Let's try to not cover the same ground
The flaws in the paint-can test have already been pointed out. I'm sure some people still have some sort of focusing issues, but I think it's silly to say that a lens model works on crop bodies but not on full frame for some mystical reason. As for calibration, apparently it was the issue in at least one case.
BTW, although it may be the best performing 50mm and have very few CAs of any kind, the 50mm Summilux ASPH is not apochromatic. You might be thinking of the 70/2 or 90/2.
The Summilux 50 is apo, it's just not advertised. It is the same optical formula as the 75/1.4 Aspherical APO with the addition of one optical (non-apochromatic) element. I read an interview with Walter Mandler that clearly said so...
EDIT Here's the interview with Peter Karbe (not Mandler, my bad) where he explains the Summilux 50/1.4 being APO.
I can say for a fact that this lens is awesome on the 5d. The Renee fashion show photos on my blog were taken in low light conditions and the lens didn't hunt one bit. Link is: http://aphotojournalist.blogspot.com
nana kofi wrote:
I can say for a fact that this lens is awesome on the 5d. The Renee fashion show photos on my blog were taken in low light conditions and the lens didn't hunt one bit. Link is: http://aphotojournalist.blogspot.com
What's your serial if you don't mind me asking?
EDIT: Also all the exif info is stripped out of your pics? could you please share a 100% crop of the face from this pic? Thanks
The Sigma 50mm definitely has way more of a contrast punch, wide open, than the Canon 1.4 (seen it already stated, thought I'd throw my opinion in that lot too). Sharper wide open also, which is fantastic.
Well, I've owned several samples of Sigma's and the only thing that bothered me was focus issues and the occasional need to re-chip. But that was when I shot with canon ... and frankly I always had focus issues of some sort on the platform for the way I shoot - so it was simply of problem of a small magnitude of degree.
But I've been a bit leary of Sigma's since despite my logical side.
I was going to buy the Zeiss soon .... but after seeing this I'm going with the sigma.
I happen to like my bokeh to disappear. Fashion and portraits simply have more impact where you want it with unobtrusive details. But also there is the simple fact that my Nikon 50 is decent, but also it is very similar to all the others. Only a photographer gets excited about the differences so subtle among each of these lenses. There simply are no visible difference until one makes a career of looking for them instead of shooting photographs. Only the sigma stands out. Only the Sigma stand out to the degree that "normal" people see it, plain as day. Only the sigma has a completely different signature.
That makes it worth it's weight in gold.
I agree with Pavel, the Sigma has a different signature. It s well worth the price, on the other side its not really as sharp as other lenses stopped down and it may have a little less DOF than a good prime. The Sigma does not stand a chance at f5.6 against my fast ZF 50. Just an observation
Pavel wrote:
But I've been a bit leary of Sigma's since despite my logical side.
I was going to buy the Zeiss soon .... but after seeing this I'm going with the sigma.
The little CZ 50 1.7 is about $100 and is extremely sharp stopped down. For most uses the Sigma stopped down is just fine. But for critical work at 50mm stopped down there are many inexpensive lenses that are good choices, including Canon.
The nice thing about the Sigma besides the open performance is the AF. 50mm and above I think it's nice to have AF.
Pavel wrote:
I happen to like my bokeh to disappear. Fashion and portraits simply have more impact where you want it with unobtrusive details. But also there is the simple fact that my Nikon 50 is decent, but also it is very similar to all the others. Only a photographer gets excited about the differences so subtle among each of these lenses. There simply are no visible difference until one makes a career of looking for them instead of shooting photographs. Only the sigma stands out. Only the Sigma stand out to the degree that "normal" people see it, plain as day. Only the sigma has a completely different signature.
That makes it worth it's weight in gold. ...Show more →
What about the EF 1.2L? What do you think about its signature?
Just to add more data, I bought a new Sigma 50 from B&H last week, serial number 1008xxx. I shot about 500 frames with it (and my 28-75, Canon 50/1.4, and Canon 35/2 for comparison) over Christmas. My copy has no focus problems on my 40D; it's at least as consistent as any of the other lenses I tested it against, and doesn't seem to have any problems at any focus distance.
The only strange behavior I noticed is that when I shot a Christmas tree with the focus thrown way out (near side), the enormous circles of light had concentric rings inside them... they looked like the diffractive front glass of a lighthouse. Has anyone else seen this behavior? It didn't show up in any other photos, just this one.
CKrueger wrote
The only strange behavior I noticed is that when I shot a Christmas tree with the focus thrown way out (near side), the enormous circles of light had concentric rings inside them... they looked like the diffractive front glass of a lighthouse. Has anyone else seen this behavior?
That's pretty common. Somebody being sure about the reason may explain, I guess it has something to do with molded elements. I have seen it with the Sigma 30/1.4, Sigma 50/1.4, several other lenses including the Leica 90Cron AA.
