Sigma primes

divamum

Any news on the Sigma 85 1.4? Sorry if it's here and I missed it (I did scan the headers, but I've been kinda awol so if it's back several pages and I didn't see it... apologies!)

I'm curious. The Canon 85 1.8 is a great lens, but given the shooting I do I can ALWAYS use any extra light, so it intrigues me, particularly if it's truly sharp at 1.4. Has it hit the streets yet? Just wondering... have only seen a few press releases, and that's it.

Also, anybody here use the Sigma 50 1.4? I'm toying with swapping to it. My Canon 50 1.4 is a perfectly fine lens - probably my most-used lens, in fact - but it is reputedly softer than the Sigma at 1.4 and, since I shoot open so often, I'm wondering if it's worth considering a change. (The Canon 85 and 50 1.2 lenses are NOT options, so let's not even go there :rofl)

Just curious!

ETA: My current lens lineup:

Tamron 17-50 2.8
Canon 50mm 1.4
Canon 85 1.8
Canon 135 2.0
Kenko 1.4x TC

divamum

Wow...deafening silence. Not even any thoughts from our resident Sigma-lover, art?!

Bueller? Anybody??

Jane B.

OT What did you do about remote?

divamum wrote:

Wow...deafening silence. Not even any thoughts from our resident Sigma-lover, art?!

Bueller? Anybody??

As the Title says I am wondering if you ever did anything about a remote as talked about in this thread http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=161488

Or are you still looking? Just checked that thread and you did not come back yet with what you decided.
Jane B.

divamum

Jane B. wrote:

As the Title says I am wondering if you ever did anything about a remote as talked about in this thread http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=161488

Or are you still looking? Just checked that thread and you did not come back yet with what you decided.
Jane B.

Thanks Jane. In fact, I didn't decide - I've been so swamped with other things, that never DID get back to that (although I did get your kind pm, for which thanks... and apologies for the lack of response!). When it comes time to do something about it, I'll be revisiting!!

craig_d

I have not actually used the Sigma 50mm f/1.4, so my opinions are based on what I've read about it and what I know about Sigma lenses generally.

You can see test results for the Sigma and the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM side by side here.

To my eyes, in these samples, the Sigma looks marginally better in the center at f/1.4, but not by much, and neither lens looks all that good. Toward the edges, they're comparable, though they look bad in different ways. However, stopping down even to f/1.6 on both lenses, the Sigma loses what little advantage it had at f/1.4. Keep stopping down, and you'll find eventually that both lenses look great in the center, but the Canon is clearly better around the edges. Go straight to f/5.6 for a convincing demonstration of this.

Test results aside, of the three major low-cost third-party lens makers (Sigma, Tamron, Tokina), Sigma has the worst record when it comes to quality control and future compatibility. It is not at all uncommon to read reviews of Sigma lenses where the reviewer had to send his first lens back to Sigma because it had some glaring problem straight out of the box (ranging from severe front- or back-focusing to loose objects rattling around inside). Sigma also has had to offer "re-chipping" services for some of their lenses to correct compatibility problems when Canon brought out new cameras. Tamron and Tokina rarely if ever have had to do this. Because of these issues, I prefer to avoid Sigma lenses.

I can understand the attraction of a specialty lens that Canon doesn't compete with (like the Bigma), but a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 would have to be absolute hell on wheels before I would consider it over Canon's excellent and moderately-priced EF 50mm f/1.4 USM. I'm looking forward with interest to reviews of Sigma's new 85mm f/1.4, but I'm still not sure I would consider it over Canon's 85mm f/1.8. It's less than a stop faster and the Canon is a superb and economically-priced lens. (For that matter, my favorite short-telephoto prime these days is a Nikkor 85mm f/2 AI-S, for which I bought a lens mount adapter.)

Art Scott

divamum wrote:

Wow...deafening silence. Not even any thoughts from our resident Sigma-lover, art?!

Bueller? Anybody??

I NO NOTHIIIIIIIIINGK!!!!! As Sgt Schultz might have said..... Not really a prime user..........but may be owning a prime in the near future but it will be a 1:1 macro in the 150-180 range......Sorry

mud390

This may or may not help, as I haven't used the 50 1.4, but I did get a chance to use a 35 1.4 (Nikon mount) Used this for about an hour in a dimly lit bar taking pictures of both people and drinks. The lens was very fast to focus with almost no hunting. When used with the a flash (SB600, on and off camera shooting mostly drinks), the results were outstanding! Due to the lighting in the bar, most of the shots required PP for overall color (my fault not the lens). I was pleased with the lens overall and have seriously considered buying one, but unfortunately funds have not allowed this purchase. I hope that helps in some form or fashion.

Kris

JohnBiggs

There are reviews for the Sigma 50 1.4. It's much better optically however its bigger, heavier, and double the price.

I think the Canon 50 1.4 is fine. the 85 1.8 is also supposedly a really good bang for the buck.

JohnBiggs

craig_d wrote:

...I prefer to avoid Sigma lenses...

I used to own all Sigma (70-200 2.8,24-70 2.8, 2xTC, 50-500). Way to many focus and softness issues so I ended up selling it all in a year.

craig_d wrote:

...I can understand the attraction of a specialty lens that Canon doesn't compete with (like the Bigma)...

I believe the canon 100-400mm IS L is competition for the bigma.

divamum

Hmm. Maybe I just need to wait for Canon to release the 50 1.4 II that's rumoured to be on the horizon......

To be honest, what I want is a 50mm equivalent of the 135L which, sadly, even the 50L isn't (a lens which, if you believe what you read in reviews, is slow to focus and has sometimes weird bokeh... and costs the earth and sky!). Here's hoping a revised 50 1.4 will come closer to what I want.

Thanks for the responses (and keep 'em coming if anybody has anything else to add.......)

craig_d

JohnBiggs wrote:

I believe the canon 100-400mm IS L is competition for the bigma.

Obviously there's a lot of overlap between the two lenses, but if you really need 500mm and you want to go all the way down to standard length too, the Bigma is your only choice. I'm not in the market for one, though, because it's a Sigma and I find I'm evolving into a serious manual-focus prime addict.