I went with the 4th option in the poll (all distances) because it seems to be consistent enough in how much it's off at any given distance that using a microadjust setting of +15 gets it just about dead on in most cases but without the micro adjust it would be useless.
Almost a year into owning it, I still love this lens. I have to admit however that it's still hard to trust it as much as my other lenses and I have had a few shots lately squeak by as barely publishable due to significant front focus (at that time my micro adjust was set at +13, I have since revised the calibration). I'm starting to wonder if the light conditions you shoot in have an impact on how well the camera can see to focus through it. It may have it's quirks but I still consider it a keeper, fickle focus or not.
Don't give up on it if you have problems, Hatch. I guess I got lucky on my first try; mine is superior in every regard (sharpness, bokeh, light falloff, AF speed and accuracy) except defocus CA to my Canon 50/1.4. It's a spectacular lens when it's right. It feels like a shrunken-down 300/2.8IS to me.
mttran wrote:
Best way is trying at local shop. I always do that when buying my 3rd party lenses.
+1, this is what I did after sending back my first copy that displayed severe front focus at 3m. I then tried 6 copies at a local shop, and all were very good (!), so I gather I have been quite unlucky with the first copy I tried! ANyway works like a charm now, the best 50mm I ever had!
CKrueger wrote:
Don't give up on it if you have problems, Hatch. I guess I got lucky on my first try; mine is superior in every regard (sharpness, bokeh, light falloff, AF speed and accuracy) except defocus CA to my Canon 50/1.4. It's a spectacular lens when it's right. It feels like a shrunken-down 300/2.8IS to me.
Many thanks for the info. The 5D2 arrived this morning... just shot my first higher than ISO 1600 shots with it... WOW! I wouldn't go past ISO 800 on most occasions with the 5D. ISO 2500 with some noise reduction is amazing!!!
right now 23-27 (focus probs vs. no focus probs)... that's way too high a rate for me to mess with this lens a second time. especially when my 35L does what it says on the tin.
abam wrote:
right now 23-27 (focus probs vs. no focus probs)... that's way too high a rate for me to mess with this lens a second time. especially when my 35L does what it says on the tin.
My sentiments exactly. Whether or not I'll take a gamble is still in the air, but the results are a bit unsettling.
I personally can't believe that 31 out of 57 people that responded to this pole have no focus issues at all with this lens.
I bought 3 copies of the lens myself, and none of them focused properly. I decided to send my 3rd copy in to Sigma for calibration. Sigma sent it to CRIS in AZ to do the work. CRIS told me the lens was within factory tolerance, but they would calibrate it to my camera body. So, I sent them my 5D body. Got it back, and it was better, but still off. Not only that, now it was focusing very slowly, and stalling before achieving focus lock. I sent it back to CRIS. The repair log says they made some type of repair to the HSM motor and lubricated the barrel. Got it back, and focus speed was fine again, but the lens was still off. This time I called Sigma in NY and made arrangements for them to calibrate the lens...again to my 5D body.
My copy still front focuses at close distances (MFD to about 6 feet). I've learned to work around that. I should note that in all instances of my comments about not focusing properly with all the copies of this lens that I tried I am talking about wide open performance.
After everything I've been through I find it hard to believe that any copy of this lens focuses properly at all distances. If you shoot stopped down it isn't an issue, but again, I'm talking about shooting at f/1.4.
I shot with the Canon 50 f/1.4 for almost 2 years, and much of that was wide open. In my experience my Canon was sharper and more consistent wide open at close distance than any of the Sigma copies I tried (using auto focus without manual tweaking). To put things into perspective, focus accuracy/consistency wide open on my Canon wasn't stellar either, but better than the Sigma.
With all of that said, I have to admit I love the way the Sigma renders. It is a love/hate relationship I have with this lens. I sold my Canon and kept the Sigma. I curse at the Sigma regularly, but when it hits focus the images it produces are wonderful.
I'm typing this late at night, and don't have my serial number handy. I'll edit this post later and add the serial.
An update to my previous posts- after a lot of emails and phone calls Amazon agreed to replace it. The new lens came today and it behaves exactly like the first. I did some very controlled tests- it focuses ok at far distances but when tested at 8ft (50 x the focal length as suggested by some for Micro Adjustment) or closer its consistently way off. It needs MA +17 at those distances (just like the last lens) which makes it work quite nice and extremely sharp wide open. But then at distances longer than that it is completely unusable.
When I previously talked to Sigma on the phone, the guy said the lens was not intended for landscape shooting and only for close range. Pretty crazy since every other lens I've ever used works fine at any distance.
So it's going back to Amazon today- they are only offering a refund, not replacement. So I think I'm giving up on 50mm, which is too bad because the photos are really nice when in focus and I rather like this focal length.
My will focus awesome on my 5D II after +15 adjustments, but looks very very soft on my 5D. I haven't tested focusing on anything pas 10 ft because I never shoot anything past 10 ft with my 50mm. If that is the case I go to my 100mm or 70-200mm.
I thought about sending it in to get calibrated so it would work with both of my bodies, but in the future most body will let you calibrate the lenses so I'm not going to bother. I just won't use it on my 5D until I can replace that body and use my 24-105 on it.
I have an 80-400 that has been at sigma for 7 weeks because it soft focuses. They say that "old" lenses (>6 years old) cant be adjusted. WHAT A CROCK! I was ready to buy a 50mm f1.4, but no more. I wouldn't think of buying anything ever again from sigma
I just got this a week ago and it's tack-sharp at all ranges right out of the box. I can sympathize with those who got the raw end of the deal though. You just have to decide whether you can put up with "maybe" getting a good one or not...and if you can't, sell yourself on something else.
I had to buy a new 50mm on short notice yesterday, so I went to our local camera store. I wanted to buy the Sigma 1.4 but I also wanted to try it first.
They did not have it in store, so i would have had to purchase it and then pick it up at their catalog warehouse. Since I needed a lens to use next week, I did not want to go thru the hassle of buying it, picking it up, testing it at home, and returning it if it had a problem. I bought the Canon 50mm 1.4 instead, and it is excellent. Of course, it does not have the bokeh or the sharpness at large apertures, but it looks pretty good to me in the tests I've done so far.
I had no luck with mine. Calibration didn't work. I eventually sold it because of this frustration. Truth be told I'm a bit sad as optics were first rate. Bokeh was especially good.
Sorry to hear it, Yakim. Mine has been outstanding. Interestingly, I just got a 7D and playing with the AF microadjust, my Sigma 50/1.4 and Tamron 28-75 required less calibration than any of my Canon lenses.
Sample size of one, of course, so I won't draw any conclusions.
I don't have a clue how AF works but it seems odd that a single lens can accurately focus at some distances but not others. Some people say that their lens can AF close up but not at a distance vs the opposite report from other folks.
It's unfortunate because like Yakim mentioned, the lens can really produce a great image.
CKrueger wrote:
Sorry to hear it, Yakim. Mine has been outstanding. Interestingly, I just got a 7D and playing with the AF microadjust, my Sigma 50/1.4 and Tamron 28-75 required less calibration than any of my Canon lenses.
I'm getting my 7D in a few hours. If I'll ever have a chance to try another copy, I will.
CKrueger wrote:
Sample size of one, of course, so I won't draw any conclusions.
Of course. That's exactly why the OP posted the question. To gather as much info from as many users as possible.
