Story of 50mm Primes

[ifi]

I had a Canon 50mm 1.8 II, which I sold without much (if any) use when I ordered a Sigma 50mm 1.4.

Today I used the Sigma and it is has serious back/front focus issues. Micro adjustment with 7d didn't help much.

Now I have few options:
1- Replace the Sigma with another Sigma
2- Return Sigma and get a Canon 50mm 1.4
3- Return Sigma and purchase Canon 70-200 2.8 IS II which is on my wish-list.
4- Return Sigma and purchase Canon 50mm 1.4 and Canon 70-200 2.8 IS II

Please help me make the right choice

 

[pbelarge]

What are you shooting? There is a big difference between 50mm & zoom 200mm

I shoot with #2 and really am happy with the lens - on a 7D.

 

[AlexL]

Get the Canon 50 1.4

Option 4 sounds like the best choice though if there is no budget concern

 

[Derrel]

or.....
A) forcefully smash Sigma into cement sidewalk to adjust focus problem
B) locate $3.00 used UV filter, preferably a Rokenon or Sears single-coated vintage 1972 UV filter owned by a professional welder, so that it has slag spots on it, to improve Sigma's AF performance by giving it "something to work against".
C) crush left index finger in shop vise, to cause you to forget about Sigma 50mm troubles for at least 12 hours, until the emergency room morphine shot wears off
D)Buy a Canon lens and forget about the Sigma
E) Get drunk, and order TWO Canon lenses and forget about everything...

(I personally would go with Choice E on my list, which is like your list's choice #4, except in my scenario, you get to get hammered!)

 

[ifi]

What are you shooting? There is a big difference between 50mm & zoom 200mm

I shoot with #2 and really am happy with the lens - on a 7D.

I like shooting people (portraits) and want to get better at this.

Get the Canon 50 1.4

Option 4 sounds like the best choice though if there is no budget concern

Thanks

or.....
A) forcefully smash Sigma into cement sidewalk to adjust focus problem
B) locate $3.00 used UV filter, preferably a Rokenon or Sears single-coated vintage 1972 UV filter owned by a professional welder, so that it has slag spots on it, to improve Sigma's AF performance by giving it "something to work against".
C) crush left index finger in shop vise, to cause you to forget about Sigma 50mm troubles for at least 12 hours, until the emergency room morphine shot wears off
D)Buy a Canon lens and forget about the Sigma
E) Get drunk, and order TWO Canon lenses and forget about everything...

(I personally would go with Choice E on my list, which is like your list's choice #4, except in my scenario, you get to get hammered!)

#E :thumbup:

Do you think I will get to use 50mm 1.4 once I get 70-200 and the only other lens I have so far is 17-50 2.8?

Today I shot a lot of indoor flowers using Tamron and Sigma. All of the Sigma shots are confusing - I have no idea what the focus is on and for some reason I notice more noise in the images shot with Sigma. BTW I shoot RAW.

 

[Derrel]

Honestly, if you have a 17-50mm f/2.8 zoom that you are happy with, I do not think a prime 50mm 1.4 lens is going to be "that" useful. The difference would be that the Canon 50/1.4 would probably be a slight bit better optically at f/2.8 than the zoom would be at f/2.8. You'd also gain a full f/stop from f/2.8 to f/2, over which the Canon would be unmatched by the zoom,and image quality would be pretty good. From f/2 on upward to wide-open at f/1.4, I (me,personally) do not see a whole lot of use with such a wide aperture and shallow depth of field.

Everybody's different: some people really groove on shallow DOF shots, with one eyeball in focus, and the other eyeball out,and the ears totally out of focus, so they love shooting close-up people shots at f/1.4 to f/2...I personally do not like that look...

However, at longer distances, like 20-40-50 feet, at events, or outdoors in really bad light, the fast shutter speeds that an f/1.4 lens allows can mean the difference between a crisp, motion-stopping shot at 1/500 at f/1.4 as opposed to a blurry shot at 1/125 at f/2.8. So...I don't know ifi, where you'd fit in; perhaps the 17-50 f/2.8 zoom and its focal length flexibility and moderately fast f/2.8 aperture would make it your go-to lens. My guess is that with the 17-50 already, the 50mm 1.4 would not get as much use as say a spiffy new 70-200/2.8-L IS, either version I or II.

 

[Overread]

My advice would be to have the lens sent in for servicing under warrenty or try swapping for another if the retailer you are dealing with has stock. From all I have read the sigma 50mm f1.4 is overall superior to the canon 50mm f1.4 - the calibration problem can be an issue, as you have experienced, but in all honesty should not take too long to correct.

As for considering the 70-200mm f2.8 IS L its a brand new and very good lens but a totally different (and far more expensive) option to the 50mm f1.4. What you shoot the most will determine which of these two lenses you need more and which you can afford. I suspect the 50mm was the one you chose, but that its fault is making you rethink. Stick to your guns and get it fixed.

 

[ifi]

Honestly, if you have a 17-50mm f/2.8 zoom that you are happy with, I do not think a prime 50mm 1.4 lens is going to be "that" useful. ....................the 50mm 1.4 would not get as much use as say a spiffy new 70-200/2.8-L IS, either version I or II.

You are right, even when I had 50mm 1.8, I hardly ever used it, it was just sitting and gathering dust. But I was so very much impressed with Sigma 50mm 1.4's claims/reviews. I want to take portraits and I read another one of your post on (85mm 1.2 vs 70-200 2.8) and I believe you favor 70-200 2.8. (http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...ns-battle-85mm-l-1-2-vs-70-200mm-l-2-8-a.html). And I am planning to go with Mark-II (whenever I buy it).

My advice would be to have the lens sent in for servicing under warrenty or try swapping for another if the retailer you are dealing with has stock.................. I suspect the 50mm was the one you chose, but that its fault is making you rethink. Stick to your guns and get it fixed.

This is exactly why I purchased Sigma over Canon BUT $500 is a lot of money to having to send it back for service immediately after the purchase I got it from Amazon.com and they are GREAT in customer services. So I don't see no problem in returning or exchanging. I am not trying to replace 50mm 1.4 with 70-200 2.8. It is already on my wish-list

 

[Overread]

Aye it is a lot of money - but these things can happen even with canon gear ( the 100-400mm is famous for this). Part of sigma's problem is that they have to reverse engineer all their designs and mounts and don't work with canon to produce their lenses. The other "problem" is that because sigma sell a lot more units than canon (or nikon) they tend to get more errors and problems simply as a result of increased numbers of units in circulation.

With the 50mm f1.4 there are also problems with many people not being used to focusing with f1.4 lenses and reporting lens errors when infact its their own shooting that it at fault and not the lens.

 

[ifi]

Aye it is a lot of money - but these things can happen even with canon gear ( the 100-400mm is famous for this). Part of sigma's problem is that they have to reverse engineer all their designs and mounts and don't work with canon to produce their lenses. The other "problem" is that because sigma sell a lot more units than canon (or nikon) they tend to get more errors and problems simply as a result of increased numbers of units in circulation.

AKA Quality Control Issues BUT Canon 50mm 1.4 has AF issues as well, I read reviews on amazon.com.

With the 50mm f1.4 there are also problems with many people not being used to focusing with f1.4 lenses and reporting lens errors when infact its their own shooting that it at fault and not the lens.

Yes, it is a possibility, 1.4 is not easy to use/focus, that's why we have auto-focus ...I'll show it to a friend of mine who is a Canon user/expert before returning to make sure it was not a user error.

 

[KmH]

Be aware not all online reviewers know what they are talking about.

 

[pbelarge]

Be aware not all online reviewers know what they are talking about.

Opinions are like..............................................................................teeth, most people have them. :mrgreen:

 

[Derrel]

Be aware not all online reviewers know what they are talking about.

What are you talking about??? Everybody knows if it's on the web, it's true. Man, it's like you fell off a turnip truck in Iowa someplace and hit your head!
I mean c'mon, Al Gore invented the internet! Everything on the internet is a fact!:lmao:

 

[arnottfigaro44]

Return Sigma and get a Canon 50mm 1.4. The 50/1.4 is an excellent lens. On a camera with a 1.6x crop factor (10D, D60), this makes a wonderful portrait lens. One just needs to keep these quirks in mind. It's my personal opinion, Otherwise as you wish.

 

[Antithesis]

The 50 1.4 from Canon is a great lens. It gets soft wide open, like most large aperture lenses, but that's less important with portraiture. I used to shoot wide open with it on full frame and it was mostly sharp. If the scene was low-contrast, the lack of sharpness became much more pronounced.

And if you can afford it, a 70-200 is a good addition to any camera bag if you have a need for it. I had the non-IS for a while, and it was remarkably sharp. It makes a phenomenal portrait lens, but might have a bit too much reach for a crop sensor. Especially if you work in confined spaces at all.