I have decided to go with a few primes, I have the 85 1.8 now and a friend of mine has a Sigma 50 1.4 and swears by it and some of the sample shots I see here it's a very nice lens. But seeing this other post with the AF issues now I am worried and would like to know how bad is this issue with the Sig. There are other options like the Canon 50 1.4 any input would be nice
I got mine, had a small back focus issue, sent to Sigma, now it takes tack sharp photos even at 1.4. Well worth the effort. I'd say don't let the internet chatter scare you off. This is a great lens that is capable of producing fabulous images...all at a very reasonable price.
As far as I know, they are all bad with AF. This seems almost universal with full-frame cameras. With crops, it seems there are mixed reports. Not sure why.
I have mine adjusted for close to intermediate (8 feet or so) focus. Anything past that and the focus is off.
Though when it does focus, the bokeh is great and the sharpness is very good at f/1.4. Almost no CA, unlike my 85L which has very annoying amounts. Though the 85L is noticeably sharper even at f/1.2.
I have tried 3 copies of the lens and returned them all. Two on a 40D and one on a 5DMkII. They all front-focused at close range and back-focused when shooting over 10 feet.
And I have had no luck with Sigma Service either. I've sent two lenses in (one 50mm and one 70-200 f/2.8) and neither came back even the slightest bit better IMO.
Well after much angst about what 50 to get, I've taken the plunge on the Sigmalux. I really wanted the 50L, but chickened at the last moment over the price. From the comparison of shots I saw on flickr, the Sigma is very close in IQ and for about 40% of the price hard to beat. Hopefully get the lens tomorrow and get one that's accurate
Now I have the same dilemma over an 85., but at least there, the 85L has accurate focus
robsuh wrote:
As far as I know, they are all bad with AF. This seems almost universal with full-frame cameras. With crops, it seems there are mixed reports. Not sure why.
Absolutely not true. Mine is essentially perfect on my 1Ds II. It's not as accurate as the 85L, but it's significantly more accurate than my old Canon 50 f/1.4, and I get about a 95% dead on focus rate. No front focus. No back focus. At all distances.
Jman13 wrote:
Absolutely not true. Mine is essentially perfect on my 1Ds II. It's not as accurate as the 85L, but it's significantly more accurate than my old Canon 50 f/1.4, and I get about a 95% dead on focus rate. No front focus. No back focus. At all distances.
Yeah my friends is very good with no going into the shop. That is what I worry about having to return many copies so worse yet sending to Sigma
kewlcanon wrote:
On another thread somebody has to send multiple times.
Yes, there is always that someone. I guess by those standards, no one should have ever purchased the 1dIII. I have both a 120-300 and the 50 1.4 from Sigma, sent both in and both are perfect.
chez wrote:
Why? I sent it in, 3 weeks later I had a perfect lens. Where is the hassle?
Well maybe your the lucky one I don't want to spend $500 on a lens then go through the frustration of dealing with a lens that's not good. I pay that kind of money it should be good and like kewlcanon says there has been several people saying they have sent it back several times. Now this lens has jumped up in price because of shipping charges plus being without a lens for even a week sucks
chez wrote:
Yes, there is always that someone. I guess by those standards, no one should have ever purchased the 1dIII. I have both a 120-300 and the 50 1.4 from Sigma, sent both in and both are perfect.
tanglefoot47 wrote:
Well maybe your the lucky one I don't want to spend $500 on a lens then go through the frustration of dealing with a lens that's not good. I pay that kind of money it should be good and like kewlcanon says there has been several people saying they have sent it back several times. Now this lens has jumped up in price because of shipping charges plus being without a lens for even a week sucks
Well if you know your answer already...why did you ask the question?
chez wrote:
Well if you know your answer already...why did you ask the question?
because I am wanting to know all about this lens as possible I want to hear from real peopel who have this lens and I don't have all the answers. It looks like a very nice lens and I am trying to find all the positive things about it as I can
If you don't want to risk Sigma's QC..then pay $1300 and get the Canon 50L. Of course, I tried two 50Ls, both of which frontfocused like mad, and my Sigma 50 was great out of the box. Since I would say the Sigma 50 is every bit as good optically as the 50L, I think the $800 savings is worth a 2-3 week hassle if you need to send it in, but that's just me (especially since there's no guarantee you'll get a perfect 50L either).
Anyway, I love my Sigma 50. Beautiful bokeh, sharp, wonderful color, and an exquisite contrast curve...it just has a presence.
tangle, it all depends on if you're willing to be patient until you get a good one-there have been at least 3 people on this forum who have reported sending back multiple copies and others dealing with sigma service, etc.-it's not an isolated incident or a blown up internet scare-i just sent back my 2nd copy to adorama b/c it was a bad copy-if you're willing to do that, go for it-warranty will cover it but it certainly is frustrating
i will say, when it does hit focus, it produces gorgeous images
