Drew_Persson wrote:
How do we know the OP images are front-focused? We don't know which AF points were used. Perhaps the camera locked on to the microphone stand. Also, these are low-light shots, which may have been a challenge for the body AF. What shutter speed? Perhaps singer movement affected sharpness a tiny bit.
Too many variables for these photos to be considered proof of anything, other than bokeh.
Agreed, and I'm not saying the OP's photos are proof that the lens design is faulty. Instead, I'm pointing out that in this very thread we have someone who appears happy with his lens's AF performance but posts pictures where the AF has missed the subject a bit-- for whatever reason, including his own technique or the body. If you just total up the responses in this thread, of people who have used the lens, as pluses or minuses (or zeros if you like) in support of the Sigma's AF performance, I have to count the OP's post as a minus or at least as a zero.
I count your response, of course, as a plus. I notice JMan13 also has a 1Ds Mark II. If that's what it takes to get accurate focus with a Sigma 50, unfortunately I am still left out-- I won't be buying a 1-series any time soon.
After reading every review out there, plus the huge thread here in the alternative gear section, I decided I would try one. I really like my Canon 50 f/1.4 a lot, I'm just not crazy about the bokeh in many cases, so that is the real attraction for me with the Sigma.
I got mine yesterday, and just packed it up to return it today I put it on my 5D on a tripod and took shots at f/1.4-f/4 and found sharness to be terrible wide open and barely acceptable at f/4. I put my Canon 50 f/1.4 on the camera and took the same shots at the same apertures and my Canon was literally twice as sharp wide open. The focus mechanism also seemed "clunky" to me on the Sigma. Maybe a mechanical defect? I could not get better results manually focusing either.
I'm getting a replacement, so we'll see what happens with the 2nd copy.
Mark Zwiesler wrote:
After reading every review out there, plus the huge thread here in the alternative gear section, I decided I would try one. I really like my Canon 50 f/1.4 a lot, I'm just not crazy about the bokeh in many cases, so that is the real attraction for me with the Sigma.
I got mine yesterday, and just packed it up to return it today I put it on my 5D on a tripod and took shots at f/1.4-f/4 and found sharness to be terrible wide open and barely acceptable at f/4. I put my Canon 50 f/1.4 on the camera and took the same shots at the same apertures and my Canon was literally twice as sharp wide open. The focus mechanism also seemed "clunky" to me on the Sigma. Maybe a mechanical defect? I could not get better results manually focusing either.
I'm getting a replacement, so we'll see what happens with the 2nd copy.
Good luck. That sort of story doesn't bother me as much as the spotty-AF ones, since those problems can be overlooked and underreported, and can lead one to keep a lens until after a return period.
Jeff;
Thanks, I really do hope the 2nd copy is good. If not, I don't think I'm going to try for a 3rd.
I will say that Amazon has really impressed me in this case. I processed the return this morning and they've already e-mailed me that I will have my replacement copy by 4/27. They are picking up all of the shipping charges.
I really hope they don't turn around and try to sell this copy to another customer. I did report it as defective, but who knows.
I put it on my 5D on a tripod and took shots at f/1.4-f/4 and found sharness to be terrible wide open and barely acceptable at f/4. I put my Canon 50 f/1.4 on the camera and took the same shots at the same apertures and my Canon was literally twice as sharp wide open. The focus mechanism also seemed "clunky" to me on the Sigma. Maybe a mechanical defect? I could not get better results manually focusing either.