cogitech wrote:
While I do believe Sigma is going to sell several shedloads of these 85/1.4s, I will be sticking with the combo of Rokinon 85/1.4 + EF 85/1.8. The Rokinon covers 99% of my needs at 85mm because I far prefer manual focus and its drawing style (sharpness, bokeh, colour, etc.) is simply superb. When I (very rarely) need AF at 85mm, I can't think of a better lens than the 85/1.8.
Hey - snap! Having cycled through the 85L, Nikon 85/1.4, Pentax A* 85/1.4, 85L II, Zeiss 85/1.4, et al . . . I've ended up with exactly the same solution: 85/1.8 when speedy AF is critical; Rokinon for everything else. It would be cute to replace this pair with the Sigma 85, or even a quicker 85L III, but unusually the Sigma's 85mm MTF is worse than its 50mm: I'm fairly convinced it wouldn't be a step forward optically from either the Canon or the Rokinon.
But I am curious about all these Sigma 50/1.4 shots published here: please tell: are these manually focused? If AF, have you got your lens setup for near- or far-distance accuracy? Or do you microadjust between captures?
hubsand wrote:
But I am curious about all these Sigma 50/1.4 shots published here: please tell: are these manually focused? If AF, have you got your lens setup for near- or far-distance accuracy? Or do you microadjust between captures?
Personally I always MF when wide open or near wide open, far or near, with any fast lens, but my Sigma is dead on at normal distance and pretty accurate near mfd. I'll use AF to get in the zone, but use MF to plae focus exactly where I want it.I don't bother with MA.
SloPhoto wrote:
It will take years and years for that to wear off, and in order to even start getting over it they will have to be at or above OEM QC levels.
It may take years for a few people who had issues to get over it, but the 50/1.4 has increased Sigma's standing in my view.
No MF with my sigma 50. The accuracy is at least as good as any of the nikon or canon 50 1.4 and 1.2 lenses I have owned. What really separates the sigma over canon and nikon is the focus speed. It is much quicker.
hubsand wrote:
But I am curious about all these Sigma 50/1.4 shots published here: please tell: are these manually focused? If AF, have you got your lens setup for near- or far-distance accuracy? Or do you microadjust between captures?
This is possibly the worst lens WRT AF accuracy. There are plenty of threads about it.
old yorker wrote:
It may take years for a few people who had issues to get over it, but the 50/1.4 has increased Sigma's standing in my view.
+1 Many have had issues with the AF on the 50/1.4--its a legitimate issue that has been much discussed on this site. But many have not. For those who haven't, it is a great lens (superior to Canon's version) imho. AF aside, the work that went into making this a great IQ/bokeh lens for APS-C cams, especially, is impressive.
old yorker wrote:
It may take years for a few people who had issues to get over it, but the 50/1.4 has increased Sigma's standing in my view.
A few people? I tried out four sigma 50/1.4's, FOUR, and all four had issues. That said, I am not the only one who tested multiple copies of the lens to no avail. I wouldn't consider those good odds at all.
M Vers wrote:
A few people? I tried out four sigma 50/1.4's, FOUR, and all four had issues. That said, I am not the only one who tested multiple copies of the lens to no avail. I wouldn't consider those good odds at all.
And there were many ( me included ) that have no problems with their 50 1.4. Given the results I am getting from my 50, I am very much anticipating the 85mm.
chez wrote:
And there were many ( me included ) that have no problems with their 50 1.4. Given the results I am getting from my 50, I am very much anticipating the 85mm.
Yet you don't find it extremely odd that four of four copies I had experience with had issues? I get that there are some people who have had good experiences, but four lenses out of four being poor performers...c'mon, you've got to admit there is something wrong there. And keep in mind, I am not the only one who went through that.
And IIRC you sent your lens to Sigma for calibration...there was a reason for that, right?
