Nick Nishizaka wrote:
I went through the same song and dance with my original 50L (PCB assembly, electrical adjustment, yada, yada, yada) with completely opposite results. So it's not so cut and dry and it remains to be a crap shoot.
There's really only so much they can do because it's a design "feature"...but getting the regular back focus problem which many seem to have, will go a long way...
Mine hasn't really shown the aperture-dependent focus shift that some have reported, so I'm a little skeptical of the theory that this is endemic to the lens design. I am a former Leica Noctilux owner and am well-acquainted with this phenomenon, but I've never seen Canon publicly acknowledge this.
I feel your pain on the spotty service with Canon. I've had very similar issues in the past, once having to return a brand new 24L Mark I twice before it came back focusing more or less correctly.
I will say that Canon seems to have made some changes in the past year or two. My last few service encounters have met or exceeded my expectations (though I'm a Platinum CPS member, so perhaps that helps).
I have not experienced 50L focus shift issue. Regardless what i try to do, it seem to work just like any other L lenses i have. I would suspect the body AF is the guity one.
garyvot wrote:
Mine hasn't really shown the aperture-dependent focus shift that some have reported, so I'm a little skeptical of the theory that this is endemic to the lens design. I am a former Leica Noctilux owner and am well-acquainted with this phenomenon, but I've never seen Canon publicly acknowledge this.
I feel your pain on the spotty service with Canon. I've had very similar issues in the past, once having to return a brand new 24L Mark I twice before it came back focusing more or less correctly.
I will say that Canon seems to have made some changes in the past year or two. My last few service encounters have met or exceeded my expectations (though I'm a Platinum CPS member, so perhaps that helps). ...Show more →
I am in no way doubting that you have what amounts to a "good" copy of this lens. I've also seen samples from others who have "good" copies of this lens.
However, it's no secret that there are much more than a handful of not so great copies out there as well and the issues are well documented and I have personally gotten the "it's a product limitation" claim from Canon engineers themselves.
The confusion is there because there's just so many variations of the issue. Some, like youself don't see the shift creep outside of DOF limits and for all intents and purposes this can be defined as a good copy. It shifts. I believe every copy shifts. But it's to what degree it does that can make or break things for an owner.
My first copy was garbage. The current UW date coded copy I have, which I received directly from Canon is the best out of 5 or 6 that I have owned or tried. It still shifts, but most of the time it is inconsequential.
It's been over a year since I sent it in for calibration. (yes, even the copy I got from Canon needed calibration right out of the box!) Perhaps they have figured things out in terms of finetuning the AF algorithm. When I get a chance, perhaps I can send it in and keep my fingers crossed!
Nick Nishizaka wrote:
My first copy was garbage. The current UW date coded copy I have, which I received directly from Canon is the best out of 5 or 6 that I have owned or tried. It still shifts, but most of the time it is inconsequential.
It's been over a year since I sent it in for calibration. (yes, even the copy I got from Canon needed calibration right out of the box!) Perhaps they have figured things out in terms of finetuning the AF algorithm. When I get a chance, perhaps I can send it in and keep my fingers crossed!
(Pax on the focus shift issue...)
My experience is not dissimilar. I bought, and returned, two copies within a few months of its release. Both had inconsistent focus, and poor sharpness wide open (not even focus-related). I wrote off the lens.
Then on a whim, I asked for a loaner copy from CPS for a job last year. That copy was great. (Interestingly, it had a "refurb" sticker on it). Made me realize that the lens design is probably okay, but there is something going south in the manufacturing, QA, or whatever. Finally got around to buying another one, which was better than my first two but still not perfect, hence the story above... I do think I am going to feel better about the lens after the recent calibration.
It's a shame really, because this lens has (had?) the potential to be a legendary optic. On the positive side, I recall that similar issues dogged the 100-400 and the 400 DO for the first year or two after they were released, but newer production copies are much better...
In following this thread, I checked up on the price of the 50L at one of the big NY houses.
Wow! Two months ago, before the price increases, it was $1,349 after rebate. Now, back on the market, at full price, it's selling for (brace yourselves) $1,599. And, "out of stock" at more than just a few places.
I have been wanting one of these Sigma 50 1.4 for a long time now and I am so tempted to get one. But I would hate it if I got a bad one and had to send it back or in for serve. But what I see it's a great lens at a fraction of the cost
sirimiri wrote:
In following this thread, I checked up on the price of the 50L at one of the big NY houses.
Wow! Two months ago, before the price increases, it was $1,349 after rebate. Now, back on the market, at full price, it's selling for (brace yourselves) $1,599. And, "out of stock" at more than just a few places.
Yikes, Canon! That's an insane jump?!?!?
not that much more insane then the cheaper price you listed
