Besides the heft, is the 50mm 1.4 worth the extra cost over the 1.8

Started Apr 13, 2013 | Discussions thread
Keith Z Leonard Veteran Member • Posts: 5,997
Re: Besides the heft, is the 50mm 1.4 worth the extra cost over the 1.8

Kabe Luna wrote:

I had the Sigma for a few weeks, and I agree its image quality is hands-down the best of all the available 50/1.4 options (it even fares quite well against the vaunted 50/1.2L). However, from what I understand, it's impossible to get the Sigma to focus at the same point throughout its focus range. By default, it focuses correctly at the mid-range (say, for a waist-up portrait), but it's off for near and long distances–significantly so for wide apertures. If you fine-tune the AF for better close-up or near-infinity results, you give up accuracy, progressively, throughout the rest of the range.

I would say that your understanding might be flawed.  YOU can't do it with MFA, but the Sigma optical bench seem to have done a fine job on mine.

My experience with the lens was elation with its image quality, followed by ever-greater frustration about not being able to get that image quality through the wider range of usage. I sold it and got the Canon 50/1.4, which isn't as great wide open, but isn't very far off (and is actually better from f/4 onward) and actually focuses well and consistently from near to far distances.

The Canon's a good lens, just wish it had ring USM.

-- hide signature --
 Keith Z Leonard's gear list:Keith Z Leonard's gear list
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Canon EOS 400D +16 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow