This topic is in the 2010 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2010Which 50?
p.5 #1Which 50?
You *can* get good bokeh from the 50/1.8... you can't make blanket assertions like this... just like you *can* get good bokeh from the 50/1.4... and almost any lens in the right situations.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Yeah I was going to say none of those could be the f/1.8, the bokeh in all 3 cases was very nice. My first guess was they were all f/1.2's.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Yeah I was going to say none of those could be the f/1.8, the bokeh in all 3 cases was very nice. My first guess was they were all f/1.2's.
May 18, 2010 at 08:12 AM
p.5 #2Which 50?
+1 on that
To be honest, besides the pentagonal OOF highlights, I haven't really noticed that the bokeh on the 50 f/1.8 is that bad. Despite the pentagonal highlights, I find it can be quite creamy and refined. Not as good as the 50 f/1.2 imo, but the 50 f/1.2 imo SPANKS other lenses in bokeh, most notably my 35L which produces kit lens like bokeh next to the 50 f/1.2 in certain conditions
It's all subjective - lenses I find have harsh bokeh include:
100 macro vanilla
70-200 f/4L IS
200 f/2L IS - yes, I kid not, just check out some recent samples in that thread including mine, the bokeh can often be horrid
To be honest, besides the pentagonal OOF highlights, I haven't really noticed that the bokeh on the 50 f/1.8 is that bad. Despite the pentagonal highlights, I find it can be quite creamy and refined. Not as good as the 50 f/1.2 imo, but the 50 f/1.2 imo SPANKS other lenses in bokeh, most notably my 35L which produces kit lens like bokeh next to the 50 f/1.2 in certain conditions
It's all subjective - lenses I find have harsh bokeh include:
100 macro vanilla
70-200 f/4L IS
200 f/2L IS - yes, I kid not, just check out some recent samples in that thread including mine, the bokeh can often be horrid
May 18, 2010 at 08:28 AM
p.5 #3Which 50?
cmaeda wrote:
, but it seems that for Canon, a very good 50 does not exist (at least according to reviews). The 50L seems to have focusing issues and it not that sharp at 1.2. The Canon 50/1.4 is prone to breaking (my friend had his AF fail). The Sigma 50/1.4 has the inconsistent focus/QC issues and the Canon 50/1.8 is flimsy and not as good IQ as the others. So, my reasoning is that with the Sigma, I'll be getting top notch IQ, with a chance at getting a good copy (and a good price).
IMHO this is not true. I am very happy with my 50/1.4. one AF fail does not proof it's a consistant failer. In fact I prefer the canon 50/1.4 over the L and the Sigma.
Krien
, but it seems that for Canon, a very good 50 does not exist (at least according to reviews). The 50L seems to have focusing issues and it not that sharp at 1.2. The Canon 50/1.4 is prone to breaking (my friend had his AF fail). The Sigma 50/1.4 has the inconsistent focus/QC issues and the Canon 50/1.8 is flimsy and not as good IQ as the others. So, my reasoning is that with the Sigma, I'll be getting top notch IQ, with a chance at getting a good copy (and a good price).
IMHO this is not true. I am very happy with my 50/1.4. one AF fail does not proof it's a consistant failer. In fact I prefer the canon 50/1.4 over the L and the Sigma.
Krien
May 18, 2010 at 08:31 AM
p.5 #4Which 50?
Mine failed too... as did many others. Just because your's hasn't failed *yet* does not mean that it is a robust design.
Krien wrote:
IMHO this is not true. I am very happy with my 50/1.4. one AF fail does not proof it's a consistant failer. In fact I prefer the canon 50/1.4 over the L and the Sigma.
Krien
Krien wrote:
cmaeda wrote
, but it seems that for Canon, a very good 50 does not exist (at least according to reviews). The 50L seems to have focusing issues and it not that sharp at 1.2. The Canon 50/1.4 is prone to breaking (my friend had his AF fail). The Sigma 50/1.4 has the inconsistent focus/QC issues and the Canon 50/1.8 is flimsy and not as good IQ as the others. So, my reasoning is that with the Sigma, I'll be getting top notch IQ, with a chance at getting a good copy (and a good price).Krien
May 18, 2010 at 08:55 AM
p.5 #5Which 50?
does using the FTM on the 50 1.4 even though is not a genuine ring USM bring on AF fail faster than just using it in either AF of MF modes
May 18, 2010 at 09:17 AM
p.5 #6Which 50?
kewlcanon wrote:
Xmas is here...Sigma 50
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4004/4613989212_8e96efe4db_b.jpg
Nice Sig 50 you got there.
Jim
Xmas is here...Sigma 50
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4004/4613989212_8e96efe4db_b.jpg
Nice Sig 50 you got there.
Jim
May 18, 2010 at 09:28 AM
p.5 #7Which 50?
I bought the EF50L for several months, so far so good, I reviewed ton of photos from 50mm (135 format) before bought this lens. I know the scientific test on this lens is not good but I really love the effect come out from this lens, color is shiny, king at night , no regret. Some recent shots, all wide open @ f/1.2, 5D2
, no regret. Some recent shots, all wide open @ f/1.2, 5D2 |
||
| http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/KKFung/IMG_4142.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/KKFung/IMG_4084.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/KKFung/IMG_4075.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/KKFung/IMG_4079.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/KKFung/IMG_3075.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/KKFung/IMG_3716.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/KKFung/IMG_3789.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/KKFung/IMG_3780.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/KKFung/IMG_3788.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/KKFung/IMG_3818.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/KKFung/IMG_3816.jpg | ||
|
May 18, 2010 at 10:04 AM
p.5 #8Which 50?
I also tried some action shots with AI servo (bad AF lens + Bad AF camera 
) this weekend, all @ f/1.2
) this weekend, all @ f/1.2 |
||
| http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/KKFung/IMG_4181.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/KKFung/IMG_4183.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/KKFung/IMG_4191.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/KKFung/IMG_4198.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/KKFung/IMG_4221.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/KKFung/IMG_4171.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/KKFung/IMG_4170.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/KKFung/IMG_4228.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/KKFung/IMG_4243.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/KKFung/IMG_4239.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/KKFung/IMG_4249.jpg | ||
|
May 18, 2010 at 10:14 AM
p.5 #9Which 50?
Ian.Dobinson wrote:
does using the FTM on the 50 1.4 even though is not a genuine ring USM bring on AF fail faster than just using it in either AF of MF modes
I'm not sure if it does but any good bump to the front end while its extended can cause the AF to fail (its not assured but the little nub and track inside is easily warped). This is exactly what happened to my lens (fell on its face and the AF stopped working).
As far as it not working over time (even though its been babied), I can see the plastic internal nubs getting worn over time.
does using the FTM on the 50 1.4 even though is not a genuine ring USM bring on AF fail faster than just using it in either AF of MF modes
I'm not sure if it does but any good bump to the front end while its extended can cause the AF to fail (its not assured but the little nub and track inside is easily warped). This is exactly what happened to my lens (fell on its face and the AF stopped working).
As far as it not working over time (even though its been babied), I can see the plastic internal nubs getting worn over time.
May 18, 2010 at 12:22 PM
p.5 #10Which 50?
Jim Victory wrote:
kewlcanon wrote:
Xmas is here...Sigma 50
Nice Sig 50 you got there.
Jim
May 18, 2010 at 12:25 PM
p.5 #11Which 50?
I have not owned any of the Canon 50s, but I can tell you when I received the Sigma 50 I had purchased it was the first lens that made me go "OMG" when taking a look at the shots it produced. If you get a good copy (I was lucky enough to get a good one on my first try from B&H) it has wonderful bokeh, color/contrast and overall IQ. I don't regret getting it at all. I would recommend this lens to anyone.
Joe
Joe
May 18, 2010 at 05:25 PM
p.5 #12Which 50?
KKFung wrote:
I also tried some action shots with AI servo (bad AF lens + Bad AF camera ) this weekend, all @ f/1.2
quote]
KKFung, awesome lens awesome images awesome shooter
I also tried some action shots with AI servo (bad AF lens + Bad AF camera
) this weekend, all @ f/1.2quote]
KKFung, awesome lens awesome images awesome shooter
May 18, 2010 at 10:12 PM
p.5 #14Which 50?
RobertLynn wrote:
I hate 50mm FL
That is, of course, a matter of opinion. I happen to like a normal FL. This actually making me realize I have way too many 50ish lenses.
Dan
I hate 50mm FL
That is, of course, a matter of opinion. I happen to like a normal FL. This actually making me realize I have way too many 50ish lenses.
Dan
May 19, 2010 at 12:31 AM
p.5 #15Which 50?
I just received my Sigma 50. It is front focusing right out of the box. I had to MA -16 and it seems ok. I am also surprised at how sharp it is wide open. With that said, I am not sure if I want to keep it or not. I'm going to shoot with it a few days to see.
Having to MA a lens right after I get it does not inspire confidence in this lens, if you know what I mean.
Having to MA a lens right after I get it does not inspire confidence in this lens, if you know what I mean.
May 19, 2010 at 03:06 PM
p.5 #16Which 50?
cmaeda wrote:
I just received my Sigma 50. It is front focusing right out of the box. I had to MA -16 and it seems ok. I am also surprised at how sharp it is wide open. With that said, I am not sure if I want to keep it or not. I'm going to shoot with it a few days to see.
Having to MA a lens right after I get it does not inspire confidence in this lens, if you know what I mean.
Make sure you shoot it at all distances as well Good luck.
I just received my Sigma 50. It is front focusing right out of the box. I had to MA -16 and it seems ok. I am also surprised at how sharp it is wide open. With that said, I am not sure if I want to keep it or not. I'm going to shoot with it a few days to see.
Having to MA a lens right after I get it does not inspire confidence in this lens, if you know what I mean.
Make sure you shoot it at all distances as well
Good luck.May 19, 2010 at 03:33 PM
p.5 #17Which 50?
A couple more from the Sigmalux, both at f/2....
|
||
| http://brownphotography.smugmug.com/photos/860088244_YE6tK-XL.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://brownphotography.smugmug.com/photos/860081710_rnpZu-XL.jpg | ||
|
May 19, 2010 at 03:46 PM
p.5 #18Which 50?
M Vers wrote:
Having to MA a lens right after I get it does not inspire confidence in this lens, if you know what I mean.Make sure you shoot it at all distances as well Good luck.
Yup, that's what I did. It seems to front focus a tad more when the subject is farther away. At -16, the focus mid point is a little behind at MFD, but the subject is still in focus. At normal ranges, it is just right, and at further ranges, it seems to be a little in front.
cmaeda wrote
I just received my Sigma 50. It is front focusing right out of the box. I had to MA -16 and it seems ok. I am also surprised at how sharp it is wide open. With that said, I am not sure if I want to keep it or not. I'm going to shoot with it a few days to see.Having to MA a lens right after I get it does not inspire confidence in this lens, if you know what I mean.
Good luck.Yup, that's what I did. It seems to front focus a tad more when the subject is farther away. At -16, the focus mid point is a little behind at MFD, but the subject is still in focus. At normal ranges, it is just right, and at further ranges, it seems to be a little in front.
May 19, 2010 at 04:35 PM
p.5 #19Which 50?
Love the 50mm FL. Have owned several copies of them all for Canon except the Zeiss 1.4. Only one I was 100% happy with was the CM 2.5. Now have an EF 1.4 which, while all copies were always stellar from 2.8 up, is very good even wide open, the only one of many I can honestly say that about. Never got a Sigma that didn't FF, even after calibration by Sigma. This EF 1.4 is my last 50 until Canon revises it or Sigma permanently fixes the FF issue. The 1.2 is fine, but not $1300 fine and was easily bested by the Sigma wide open. Yeah, I know sharpness isn't everything, but at a $900 price difference it's certainly something. The 1.8's I had were all perfectly adequate, but weren't 1.4's.
That's my experience, anyway.
That's my experience, anyway.
May 20, 2010 at 08:25 AM
p.5 #20Which 50?
outlawyer wrote:
Now have an EF 1.4 which, while all copies were always stellar from 2.8 up, is very good even wide open.
I've had the same experience with my Canon 50/1.4
Before servicing with bodies it was great only from f/2 upward, ok wider and at f/1.4 only usable if you really needed all the light you could get.
Now I don't mind using f/1.4 at all, it is that good.
My 50/1.2 is just a strange lens.
MA -3 with a 1D3 and -16 with my 5D2, at which point it has reliable performance between f/1.2 and f/4 at close to medium distances.
Will send this lens in again later this year, but for the time being I'm tired of testing and content to use it in this manner.
Ruy
Now have an EF 1.4 which, while all copies were always stellar from 2.8 up, is very good even wide open.
I've had the same experience with my Canon 50/1.4
Before servicing with bodies it was great only from f/2 upward, ok wider and at f/1.4 only usable if you really needed all the light you could get.
Now I don't mind using f/1.4 at all, it is that good.
My 50/1.2 is just a strange lens.
MA -3 with a 1D3 and -16 with my 5D2, at which point it has reliable performance between f/1.2 and f/4 at close to medium distances.
Will send this lens in again later this year, but for the time being I'm tired of testing and content to use it in this manner.
Ruy
May 20, 2010 at 11:33 AM