okafoja wrote:
It looks like Sigma has focus issue already if you have to MA to get it right. I don't see what this Sigma is doing that Canon 85/1.8 can't do. What is all the excitement about?
+1. My first impression is the 85L images are significantly cleaner/brighter.
stebesplace wrote:
@ 1.4, the 85L seems to have a more pleasing background blur to me, all the way through f/8 basically. The circular bokeh on the Sigma is a bit more distracting to me, though that could be a fair trade off between AF speed, and some other advantages (price, etc.) to the 85L.
M Vers wrote:
AF might be faster, but is it as accurate and consistent in all conditions?
That's the million dollar quesiton.
okafoja wrote:
It looks like Sigma has focus issue already if you have to MA to get it right. I don't see what this Sigma is doing that Canon 85/1.8 can't do. What is all the excitement about?
my first copy of the 85L 2 needed massive MA adjustment, 2nd copy was much better but nonetheless still need MA, if the sigma will AF spot on after MA I wouldn't worry about it. The sigma can go f/1.4 while the 85/1.8 is...well....f/1.8, the sigma appear to have MUCH better CA control, and definitely have better bokeh and render the background smoother, if you value these criteria but don't feel like paying $2K for the 85L2 (which I gladly did) then this Sigma is a good alternative.
even if you see a difference, I do not see how the 85L is worth $970 more money
especially given focus speed on the 85L
to some the difference will be worth the cost. They should buy the Canon 85L
good to see Sigma raise the bar for Canon
that could result in better L lenses
my first copy of the 85L 2 needed massive MA adjustment, 2nd copy was much better but nonetheless still need MA, if the sigma will AF spot on after MA I wouldn't worry about it. The sigma can go f/1.4 while the 85/1.8 is...well....f/1.8, the sigma appear to have MUCH better CA control, and definitely have better bokeh and render the background smoother, if you value these criteria but don't feel like paying $2K for the 85L2 (which I gladly did) then this Sigma is a good alternative.
abqnmusa wrote:
even if you see a difference, I do not see how the 85L is worth $970 more money
especially given focus speed on the 85L
to some the difference will be worth the cost. They should buy the Canon 85L
If given a set of processed images were shot with the two lenses using the same body containing the same subject matter it would be very difficult or, more likely, impossible for anyone to guess which lens made what image--the differences in IQ, based on these samples, appears to be negligible. What will probably matter more is how each lens handles in real world conditions, specifically in terms of AF. Focus speed of the 85L is one of its only weaknesses, however, even though the AF drive of the lens is slow it is still a very precise lens. IF the Sigma matches the L's precision and is quicker at doing so this lens could be a huge hit. Of course there are other factors to take into account as well--namely QC. We'll see.
ilya80 wrote:
Should Sigma release a 35 1:1.4 FF compatible lens it would be awesome.
As to comparison - I like 85L bokeh better, even when stopped down.
I think most people will agree that the 85L is a little sharper and has slightly better bokeh, but is it $1,000.00 better than the Sigma is the question?
M Vers wrote:
Focus speed of the 85L is one of its only weaknesses, however, even though the AF drive of the lens is slow it is still a very precise lens.
Exactly. AF speed of 85L II is relatively slow from MFD to infinity to be precisely. However, if your focus distance does not change much, the speed could be even faster.
Absolutely right. You are within the same zone, as you would be if you are shooting portraits, then the AF speed is just fine. Nice pictures BTW.
yxl122 wrote:
Exactly. AF speed of 85L II is relatively slow from MFD to infinity to be precisely. However, if your focus distance does not change much, the speed could be even faster.
okafoja wrote:
It looks like Sigma has focus issue already if you have to MA to get it right. I don't see what this Sigma is doing that Canon 85/1.8 can't do. What is all the excitement about?
Perhaps ask what the Canon 85mm 1.2L can do that the Sigma 85mm 1.4 can't. And is that worth $800. The 1.2L certainly can't AF as fast as the Sigma. The 1.2L is a one dimensional lens and an expensive one at that.
okafoja wrote:
It looks like Sigma has focus issue already if you have to MA to get it right. I don't see what this Sigma is doing that Canon 85/1.8 can't do. What is all the excitement about?
You know how many people use MA on Canon lenses? Personally I've never used MA.
I think for $1100 less, I could live with a minor IQ deficit. I'll be waiting for more real world test shots to appear, but initial results are promising. Nice thing about the Sigma is a have a mechanical focus ring, which makes MF a lot nicer than focus-by-wire. Hopefully Sigma AF precision is good.
Also IMO Sigma will be even cheaper after 6-12 months. $899 is not too shabby at all considering the specs alone.
The Sigma shows the usual yellow color cast (or is the Canon actullay too much Cyan?). I'm not sure if I like the Sigma colors.
I actually like the yellowish cast, reminds me of old glass (like the Takumars).
If it weren't for the fact that I already have the 50, 85 and 135L I'd be tempted to get the Sigma 50/1.4 and 85/1.4 ASAP. I'm still tempted though, but it would be a luxury that doesn't make sense (at EUR 1200,- for the pair, but instead I could expand my gear in a better way instead of getting more of the same).
But I do like the Sigma look.
...and since they've the terrible peeling coating the lenses even look good.
Todd:
That's because I deleted them from ImageEvent. Sorry about that; but there was a reason. And I'm going to post some more telling examples in a few days...
