ravon wrote:
From what you wrote I assumed you have read the reviews and discussions about this lens so I assumed you knew what to expect. Perhaps your expectations were biased by a couple of negative opinions on this lens (and on Sigma products in general) which I think are usually louder and more pronounced than the positive opinions.
The reason for the poll was to create a consensus--that's what a poll does, and since there was never a centralized consensus there was no way to determine how many lenses were affected. There was an issue, no one is denying it but just how wide spread it was was unclear (until the poll). BTW, I own and have owned a fair amount of Sigma products--none let me down. This has nothing to do with brand names or their past associations with poor QC.
The only lens I have ever had to return out of about 30 I've owned (also the only non-Canon).
- Random focus problems, off by +/- 3ft at medium distance
- Lower resolution than Canon 50 1.4
- 'Glowy' quality, especially wide open
Huge disappointment, especially being priced higher than the Canon. Some examples here seem good, but the term 'Sigmalux' that some use is laughable - Leica may be many things but reliable is one of them. 'Sigmasux' would have covered my copy better.
troutstreaming wrote:
Not to hijack the thread but is anyone out there using it for indoor sports?
I avoid my Canon 50 1.4 for sports (more from a gut feeling of how it behaves when I do have it out than any tangible testing) and would love to have something I trusted more. It would be used on Mk III, 1Ds Mk II, and 50D - so feedback on AI servo behavior in moderately to dimly lit gyms on moving subjects at F1.4 to 2.0 with subject distance of 3 to 12 feet on any of these bodies is of most interest - especially with off center focus points. I am usually selecting from amongst the 35L, 85 1.8 135L, and 200L for fast primes.
Due to the fact the Sigma does not have IF design (the front element moves in and out during focus), its AF performance, especially at AI servo, are not at the same level of the L primes. I wrote about my comparison with the 35/1.4 here.
troutstreaming wrote:
Not to hijack the thread but is anyone out there using it for indoor sports?
Here you'll find a couple of badminton pictures: http://photo.moltipop.nl.
The results I get with AF servo (400D) have not been satisfying when I try to shoot fast moving players. Until now, I get the best results by manually focussing on a certain area of the badminton court where I know the player will be in a nice position for a picture.
I absolutely love mine. Practically the only AF lens I use. And Sigmalux is a very good nickname for it I had some heavy backfocusing AF +3meters issues on 5D, but got my camera calibrated by Canon, then it front focused a tad. Now with 5D2 I dont have any problems any more - In camera micro adjustments rule!
ovredal73 wrote:
I absolutely love mine. Practically the only AF lens I use. And Sigmalux is a very good nickname for it I had some heavy backfocusing AF +3meters issues on 5D, but got my camera calibrated by Canon, then it front focused a tad. Now with 5D2 I dont have any problems any more - In camera micro adjustments rule!
Love mine too, had FF but with some microadjustment on my 5Dmk2 it's dialed in perfectly. Mine is about as sharp as the L and EF 1.4 wide open, by f2 it's razor sharp. This lens can give me the "pop" I'm looking for in a wide aperture prime. It's been on my 5Dmk2 for a week now and I see no signs of it comming off.
Yakim Peled wrote:
SN is 1001347. Now, what does it mean?
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
Sorry I missed this...
The reason for including the Serial number and the body on which the lens was used on was to try and narrow down the affected lenses and perhaps a probable cause (Is it poor QC? Mfg. issue? or just a lens characteristic?). For example--if there was a mfg issue and it was fixed it should be apparent by looking at the mfg.# 's(i.e. MKIII). Of the 28 people who voted, only 13 left a comment--of those 13 only 5 included their serial number--not a good enough percentage to determine anything really.
As someone said earlier, not a landscape lens but I have other lenses for that. I'm really pleased with mine and have had no focusing problems. My serial number begins with 1005...
Is the "glowy" quality going to vary between samples? I've had it for a day, but have shot in a few different lighting situations, and I can't decide what I have. With a flash indoors at close range (around the table), individual eyelashes are sharper than with my canon 1.4. Outside in dusk light, I wanted to throw it in the pool, nothing was sharp at all, even on high contrast edges. It seems to have trouble with sharp focus at a distance too, say 25 ft. or so. This morning in the sun, things are more glowy than I expected. I'm not sure if I am pleased, neutral, or disappointed. If "glowy" is a sample problem, I would be more inclined to exchange it.
By "glowy" I'm assuming you mean Halation? If you can post a sample--that would help significantly. Also, shoot one of your 'L boxes' (for example) at 1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6 close to MFD, 10ft, and 20ft that way you get a pretty good idea of what seems to be the issue. Make sure you use center point AF, then switch over to MF prior to pressing the shutter, adjust the aperture there on out. Repeat each time to change FD's.
yes, although truthfully I hadn't seen that term until recently. One of the issues is that all my other primes are Ls, except for the 85/1.8, so my expectations could be off. But I am surprised that at distance, where the DoF should be adequate to capture the edge I am locking on, that it is so poor. I'll take more shots at lunch and post tonight.
Very happy with mine. I have been using it on my 5D. It seems fine at all distances and with all focus points in One Shot mode, I have not tried it in AI Servo mode. It is presently my favorite lens. Very sharp, great bokeh, color and contrast. I don't have the serial number handy, but bought it new at Christmas.
Fact is, based on the present 34 responses, 24% report some kind of trouble. That is a huge percentage. Particularly if you consider that some of those probably hand-picked their lens, and others may have already returned one copy. So all is not well in Sigmaland methinks
philber wrote:
Fact is, based on the present 34 responses, 24% report some kind of trouble. That is a huge percentage. Particularly if you consider that some of those probably hand-picked their lens, and others may have already returned one copy. So all is not well in Sigmaland methinks
24% may sound high, but considering other 50mm options it's really not as bad as it seems.
My first copy was bad, AF was all over the place (even when on tripod)
Returned it to B&H and the 2nd copy is perfect!
Very sharp, good contrast wide open, nice bokeh. goof focus on my 1dMk3, and like my other sigma lens it was front focus but micro adjustment took care of that. I think this is lens is a good deal....good copies are floating around. I would like to see some images taken with this lens on a 1DsMk3
I tried out two in a shop 3 weeks or so ago and both back focussed badly on shots above about 10 ft. Focus was perfect in the mfd-4 ft range. Although i'm not an "owner" i think 30 minutes dedicated testing in a shop qualifies me for a vote. I can't remember the serial no's, but i guess they're pretty recent.
Mine copy FFs as well. Not a problem on my 5D2, but have to exchange the lens because I can't microadjust on my 1D2N. I guess it's all for the better, I'd rather have a properly calibrate lens than one I have to compensate for within the camera. Otherwise, the results on my 5D2 have been fantastic.
Also, my serial number is in the 1005xxx. I'll repost the results of my replacement lens along with the serial number (range).
I'd be interested to hear from people who decided to hold onto the copy they had, but get it serviced. I have a lab down the street, I think max it would cost me would be $20, since the calibration would be a warranty issue if it is out of spec, and that way, I would at least know I have a copy that is as good as it can be. But, if halation, etc., cannot be fixed by a lab, but is a characteristic of the sample, then maybe there are things a lab can't fix.
I had some heavy backfocusing AF +3meters issues on 5D, but got my camera calibrated by Canon, then it front focused a tad. Now with 5D2 I dont have any problems any more - In camera micro adjustments rule!
I guess it's all for the better, I'd rather have a properly calibrate lens than one I have to compensate for within the camera. Otherwise, the results on my 5D2 have been fantastic.