Well I just got my lenses and ran them through some tests (both 'scientific' and real world). Here are a few real world results shot with 'lens B', which was MA'd to +20 (!). The rest of the testing, which was done with the unadjusted lenses, can be seen on my [www].
Congrats on the lens/es Will have to look at the other copies. Mine is sitting +12 right now and hits... F/1.4 is a little soft...could use maybe one more adjustment. But... from F/1.6 on up... sharp as a tack.
If you use anything other then Canon lens on a Canon body..... You will not get the flash/body/lens communicating properly to give correct exposure...... Also the micro adjustment within the camera will not work properly...... DPP software will not correct lens distortion.
I just thought i would point all this out.....
john Lee wrote:
If you use anything other then Canon lens on a Canon body..... You will not get the flash/body/lens communicating properly to give correct exposure...... Also the micro adjustment within the camera will not work properly
That's not true in my experience. I use both Tamron and Sigma lenses and flash metering works just fine--just as well as my Canon lenses. I'm not even quite sure what you mean in regards to MA....
john Lee wrote:
If you use anything other then Canon lens on a Canon body..... You will not get the flash/body/lens communicating properly to give correct exposure...... Also the micro adjustment within the camera will not work properly...... DPP software will not correct lens distortion.
I just thought i would point all this out.....
Going to throw the BS flag on this.... shooting with the Sigma 180mm macro and the Sigma 50mm F/1.4 and have had ZERO issues with proper exposure or anything you have mentioned. But.. I did laugh a little...so thanks for the post?
M Vers wrote:
Well I just got my lenses and ran them through some tests (both 'scientific' and real world). Here are a few real world results shot with 'lens B', which was MA'd to +20 (!). The rest of the testing, which was done with the unadjusted lenses, can be seen on my [www].
It may need a bit more tweaking, but I'll fine tune it later.
Oh how I wish I had a camera body with micro adjust! Since I don't, I'm not sure what +20 means...is the lens front focusing with no adjustment?
Mark Zwiesler wrote:
Oh how I wish I had a camera body with micro adjust! Since I don't, I'm not sure what +20 means...is the lens front focusing with no adjustment?
Mark
+20 is as high as the MA will allow, and yes the lens was front focusing prior to adjustment. I'm still not sold on the lens yet, but I have narrowed it down to one of the two for further testing, the other will get sent back tomorrow.
It may need a bit more tweaking, but I'll fine tune it later.
Love the beer focus test! I'll have to try this one myself.
M Vers wrote:
Shot a few comparisons between the Sigma and the Canon 50/1.4......
Nice comparion shots.
That's why I like the Siggy. Love the bokeh with highlights and busy backgrounds -especially "folliage" bokeh, where the Siggy has much less "nervous" bokeh.
wow that sucks
i think i am going to forget about a new 50 until canon comes out with something new (i do have the 1.8)
i guess the 35l is calling my name just neeed to find the $$$ for the cost difference
toddmitchell wrote:
wow that sucks
i think i am going to forget about a new 50 until canon comes out with something new (i do have the 1.8)
i guess the 35l is calling my name just neeed to find the $$$ for the cost difference
Like I said initially, I had a 50/50 chance In any case the lens hasn't impressed me enough to pack up my EF50/1.4 just yet. I too hope that Canon releases an update to the 50/1.4 in the future. As for the 35L, it is a great lens and is quickly becoming one of my favorites, but there is a significant difference between 35mm and 50mm not to mention the difference between 35mm and 85mm.
michael49 wrote:
Love the beer focus test! I'll have to try this one myself.
Nice comparion shots.
That's why I like the Siggy. Love the bokeh with highlights and busy backgrounds -especially "folliage" bokeh, where the Siggy has much less "nervous" bokeh.
Thanks, Michael. I haven't been able to get outdoors with the lens yet, but the above tests were a bit of a turn off for me as the highlights, while more circular, have that awful swirling.
hatch1921 wrote:
Congrats on the lens/es Will have to look at the other copies. Mine is sitting +12 right now and hits... F/1.4 is a little soft...could use maybe one more adjustment. But... from F/1.6 on up... sharp as a tack.
Hatch
Sorry I missed you, Hatch. Mine seems to exhibit the same sharpness as yours, a tad soft (acceptable) at 1.4 and noticeably sharper at 1.6.
M Vers wrote:
Sorry I missed you, Hatch. Mine seems to exhibit the same sharpness as yours, a tad soft (acceptable) at 1.4 and noticeably sharper at 1.6.
No worries. Just glad you have a good copy. I shot a little today.. .and the F/1.4 shots were not bad... the DOF is razor thin... but you have to love the bokeh the lens produces. From F/1.6 on up... very nice results... F/4.0-F/5.6 WOW!!! Almost macro sharp... I like the colors/contrast this lens produces... very pleased so far(knocks on wood) I hope you find a jewel in your mix.
hatch1921 wrote:
No worries. Just glad you have a good copy. I shot a little today.. .and the F/1.4 shots were not bad... the DOF is razor thin... but you have to love the bokeh the lens produces. From F/1.6 on up... very nice results... F/4.0-F/5.6 WOW!!! Almost macro sharp... I like the colors/contrast this lens produces... very pleased so far(knocks on wood) I hope you find a jewel in your mix.
Hatch
Nice to hear you are having a relatively positive experience with your copy...I hope to be at least as lucky. My main concern is performance at and around f/1.4 (f/1.4-f/2). If the lens performs better than my EF50 I will consider keeping it, but at this point in time it hasn't 'wow'd me' optically or in terms of AF. Build quality and feel is about the only thing I'm overly impressed with atm. I'm hoping to photograph my default models (niece and nephews, cat and dogs) tomorrow to see how this lens will perform in the field.
mttran wrote:
Best way is trying at local shop. I always do that when buying my 3rd party lenses.
The local shop near me doesn't let me try lenses. They handed me a 24-70 f/2.8L and when I pulled my camera out they told me I could just hold it, but I couldn't mount it (might scratch the mount!).
kakomu wrote:
The local shop near me doesn't let me try lenses. They handed me a 24-70 f/2.8L and when I pulled my camera out they told me I could just hold it, but I couldn't mount it (might scratch the mount!).
So, I just buy things online (for cheaper).
I live in Chicago and tried in vain to find a local store that stocks the Sigma 50. One of the sales people I talked to at a reputable Chicago camera outlet told me they did not stock the lens because they had too many returns on it.
I called Sigma and they gave me the number of a sales rep that they told me could help me. He could not find a store that stocked it either, but told me I could order one through several of the stores in my area. Problem with that is that it is considered a special order, which the customer pays shipping for, and cannot be returned to the store the way a stocked item can be. Better to order on line in these circumstances.
Will have to look at the other copies. Mine is sitting +12 right now and hits... F/1.4 is a little soft...could use maybe one more adjustment. But... from F/1.6 on up... sharp as a tack. 
In any case the lens hasn't impressed me enough to pack up my EF50/1.4 just yet. I too hope that Canon releases an update to the 50/1.4 in the future. As for the 35L, it is a great lens and is quickly becoming one of my favorites, but there is a significant difference between 35mm and 50mm not to mention the difference between 35mm and 85mm.