Sigma 50 f1.4 or Tamron 45 f1.8?

Hello everyone in the forum,

Thanks to the advice of many people here I made the choice to sell my Canon 17-40 f4 L to buy the much sharper 16-35 f4 IS L and a Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art (over the 24-70 f2.8 II). The reason for this choice is mainly because I get more wide angle and better low light shooting capabilities when I need it for the events and wedding photography I do.

All of the reviews I read all insist on the stellar IQ of the 50mm f1.4 from Sigma even when used wide open, which I plan on using it a lot.

But I also read a lot of comments of people having focus accuracy problems with that lens... now look I understand it's hard for third party lens manufactures to get it to focus as accurately as a native lens but I'd rather buy a 100% accurately focusing Sigma 50mm f6.3 Art (let's pretend it exists ) which I am sure I can get sharp images with then some very sharp lens even wide open with very inconsistent AF accuracy.

Then I looked at the Tamron 45mm which is a little cheaper as well. So do you guys own one of these lenses or both, or have you shot with them, and is focus accuracy on any of these been an issue to you?

I also heard that sharpness is the same for both of these lenses, and considering sharpness is the most important criteria when I buy a lens which one do you recommend to me? Knowing that it should nail focus every time, otherwise there's no point in having a razor sharp lens...

Thank you all,

Marc

I own the Tamron 45mm - man it is built to be a workhorse! It's absolutely fantastic. It's a solid, solid performer.

Let me break it down and keep it short.

Build Quality: Amazing. It's built like a tank, and it's also weather sealed, which is super helpful out in the field.

IQ: Very sharp wide open, and razor sharp stopped down a little. Vignetting is controlled well, and it's got an awesome 0.29x magnification ratio which is a big help out in the field! Only issue is in extreme constrasty conditions (like super bright highlights) there can be some green/purple fringing - but it can definitely be edited out in post.

AF: Pretty quick - it's snappy. It isn't as fast as an STM lens, but I don't find it any slower then my 24-105mm (V1).

VC: Such a big, big help! It really benefits you out in the field, especially when you are in low light conditions. I love having the option.

Overall I love the Tamron - it's a very solid performer.

Thank you for sharing your experience with the Tamron prime! I have one more question to you: on 100 shots how many times would you say the lens could hit perfect focus? The VC and focus speed of the lens don't matter very much to me because when I shoot sports or kids running around I can use my 70-200 f4 IS L which has very fast AF. But when I'm shooting events and parties, I need to be able to freeze emotions, and to get a minimum of 1/100s shutter speed at a lower ISO I pretty much have to use the prime wide open (or near wide open). And I can live with a slower focusing lens because I can still catch the emotions of people in the shot, but a shot that is slightly off with focus is unusable (though the lens is capable of delivering stunning sharpness as you say).

How does your Tam 45mm work on 80D?

I tried refurb 45mm while ago and returned it due to its AF inconsistency , especially on 80D.

I have Sig 50mm (non Art) and this lens is good on 6D but not on 80D.

All my Canon lenses work great on 80D.

Marc dbr said:

Thank you for sharing your experience with the Tamron prime! I have one more question to you: on 100 shots how many times would you say the lens could hit perfect focus? The VC and focus speed of the lens don't matter very much to me because when I shoot sports or kids running around I can use my 70-200 f4 IS L which has very fast AF. But when I'm shooting events and parties, I need to be able to freeze emotions, and to get a minimum of 1/100s shutter speed at a lower ISO I pretty much have to use the prime wide open (or near wide open). And I can live with a slower focusing lens because I can still catch the emotions of people in the shot, but a shot that is slightly off with focus is unusable (though the lens is capable of delivering stunning sharpness as you say).

Click to expand...

I've been shooting all our church events recently with the Tamron 45mm, you can check them out here:


I've noticed that the AF nails it almost all the time. Once in a while it'll struggle if the person is moving quickly and it's very busy. But most of the time it works just fine - at least for me!

charlieY said:

How does your Tam 45mm work on 80D?

Click to expand...

I pretty much only use it on my 6D - but when I do use it on the 80D, it works just fine. AF is nice and snappy and the lens works great!

charlieY said:

I tried refurb 45mm while ago and returned it due to its AF inconsistency , especially on 80D.

Click to expand...

I got mine refurb and it's working perfectly for me!

charlieY said:

I have Sig 50mm (non Art) and this lens is good on 6D but not on 80D.

All my Canon lenses work great on 80D.

Click to expand...

I think it's hit and miss with the Third Party lenses. Mine is Gold - but I've seen others have issues with their's.

Ok thanks!

I've also heard from Sigma 35mm f1.4 and 50f1.4 Art user that that would have a copy with very bad AF inconsistency and then they'd be lucky with another very good copy, so I guess what you're saying is that it's the same issue no matter what third party lens manufacturer your lens is from.

I do think that the focus issues are more common on the Sigma side since there's a lot more controversy around it...

Marc dbr said:

Hello everyone in the forum,

Thanks to the advice of many people here I made the choice to sell my Canon 17-40 f4 L to buy the much sharper 16-35 f4 IS L and a Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art (over the 24-70 f2.8 II). The reason for this choice is mainly because I get more wide angle and better low light shooting capabilities when I need it for the events and wedding photography I do.

All of the reviews I read all insist on the stellar IQ of the 50mm f1.4 from Sigma even when used wide open, which I plan on using it a lot.

But I also read a lot of comments of people having focus accuracy problems with that lens... now look I understand it's hard for third party lens manufactures to get it to focus as accurately as a native lens but I'd rather buy a 100% accurately focusing Sigma 50mm f6.3 Art (let's pretend it exists ) which I am sure I can get sharp images with then some very sharp lens even wide open with very inconsistent AF accuracy.

Then I looked at the Tamron 45mm which is a little cheaper as well. So do you guys own one of these lenses or both, or have you shot with them, and is focus accuracy on any of these been an issue to you?

I also heard that sharpness is the same for both of these lenses, and considering sharpness is the most important criteria when I buy a lens which one do you recommend to me? Knowing that it should nail focus every time, otherwise there's no point in having a razor sharp lens...

Click to expand...

I owned (and still own) the 50 / 1.4A. I bought the Tamron based on the hype. When it arrived, I immediately compared it to the Sigma on my 6D. Within half and hour, it was boxed up for return.

Why?

The purple fringing was much worse on the Tamron than the Sigma. The Sigma focused faster (I have no AF issues with the Sigma except with outer AF points). The Tamron front or back focused when framed tightly, whether wide open or stopped down.

Now, I cannot say that all the 45 / 1.8s performed like mine did. But, I'm very happy with the 50 / 1.4A, and didn't feel the 45 / 1.8 was worth another try with another copy (if only for the focus speed).

Thank you for your comparison of both lenses, I have also read about the problem of CA on the Tamron prime, but I also think it's easily removable in Lightroom, except for the CA in the out of focus area.

Did you notice any difference in sharpness between the two lenses?

And since many 6D users report having AF problems with the outer points with the Tamron lens, did you experience the same issue with the Tamron prime as you did with the Sigma?

The 6D's center AF point is the only cross type so maybe that shows that these pines only focus well with cross type points, since I only use the 45 cross type points on my 5D mark III I may be fine concerning AF performance whether I choose the Sigma or the Tamron right?

If a key requirement for you is a lens that nails focus time in time out, you need to buy a native Canon lens.

I've been itching to buy either the Tamron or Sigma 35 & 85 lenses, but it's fighting a losing battle. They're making up so much ground, but the AF will never be comparable to that of Canon glass.

One other thing, no one has asked you the question; what are you actually shooting? When buy a 50mm, I initially completely discounted the 50mm L 1.2 as it wasn't as sharp as other lenses. Took a step back, looked at what I'd be shooting, and realised absolute pixel level sharpness isn't top priority - and what I actually use it for, the 1.2 couldn't be a better fit.

I know the best choice regarding AF reliability would be to get a lens that is native to the system you're shooting with, but in this case Canon has three 50mm prime lenses which are all outperformed by third party lens manufacturers. I love L glass, I own two L zooms myself and those are my two only lenses, I had the opportunity to shoot with a friends 50 1.2 L that I don't like... So I pretty much are in a situation where my only choice is to go for either a Tamron or a Sigma prime in that range. I do agree with you that sharpness isn't everything and for personal photography I could live with a less sharp lens when used wide open, but when I shoot events, weddings and parties for a job I want to be able to deliver perfect photos.

So really I don't need a Sigma or Tamron lens with incredibly fast autofocus, I use a 70-200 when I shoot sports or running kids, but besides the prime being sharp I also want it to be able to focus accurately every time even wide open so I don't get home after shooting an event and see on my monitor that a good chunk of the shots are slightly off...

I had a similar issue when i had to take a decision of buing the sigma 50 f1.4 (non art) or the canon 50mm f1.4 ,,the price was similar

A few people suggested me to look at the cheap canon 50mm f1.8 stm

After reading a lot of reviews and also the mtf chart analysis (mtf charts convinced me for my decision)..i saved my money and bought the cheap 50mm f1.8 stm

above f 2.8 is almost identical in sharpness with the canon 50mm f1.4 and the sigma 50mm f1.4

also this lens focuses very fast and accurate in low light

well worth the money

Marc dbr said:

besides the prime being sharp I also want it to be able to focus accurately every time even wide open so I don't get home after shooting an event and see on my monitor that a good chunk of the shots are slightly off...

Click to expand...

And this is my concern for you.

When the Sigma's nail it, they have excellent IQ, but I'd suggest doing some research on the keeper rates for the Sigma's & Tamron's.

There are A LOT of reviews of people who say their actual keeper rate on these lenses drops as low as 50%, and subsequently, I know a lot of wedding photog's who have dropped them from their kit, because they can't risk the AF not nailing it.

So apologies if I'm not being clear - I'm referring more to the AF accuracy than the AF speed.

That's exactly the answer to my question! Do you know where I can find such user reviews? So far I didn't find any about the keeper rate...

You know I really want to find out as much as possible about camera gear before buying because I personally hate returning it when it doesn't meet my expectations.. I find it to be taking advantage of other people, which I know some are fine with but I can't stand that...

Anyway, thanks a lot for your help!

Marc

The Tamron is spot on with my 6D with center point, and decent with the outer points.

YouTube, and Dustin Abbott, Christopher Frost, and Matt Grainger.

To put my cards on the table; I'm in the market for a 35mm & 85mm. Long term, it'll be the Canon 35mm 1.4 L II & 85mm 1.4 L IS (when released), but I can't warrant the price of both immediately - so I'm looking for lenses to tide me over (and potentially keep as backups).

When looking at the Sigma's & Tamron's, all three are pretty unanimous in saying their 35mm's & 85mm's are optically excellent. The one thing I don't hear any of them hitting home on (in a positive manner), is the AF. I may be asking too much, but I want all the reviewers to come out and say "you can absolutely depend on the AF", and they're not.

For that reason, I'll be getting the Canon 35mm f2 IS & 85mm f1.8 - I totally accept the Sigma's & Tamron's will be sharper, but the Canon's AF will be much more accurate.

Personally, if I had to compromise on IQ or AF, it'd be on IQ all day long.

noggin2k1 said:

YouTube, and Dustin Abbott, Christopher Frost, and Matt Grainger.

To put my cards on the table; I'm in the market for a 35mm & 85mm. Long term, it'll be the Canon 35mm 1.4 L II & 85mm 1.4 L IS (when released), but I can't warrant the price of both immediately - so I'm looking for lenses to tide me over (and potentially keep as backups).

When looking at the Sigma's & Tamron's, all three are pretty unanimous in saying their 35mm's & 85mm's are optically excellent. The one thing I don't hear any of them hitting home on (in a positive manner), is the AF. I may be asking too much, but I want all the reviewers to come out and say "you can absolutely depend on the AF", and they're not.

For that reason, I'll be getting the Canon 35mm f2 IS & 85mm f1.8 - I totally accept the Sigma's & Tamron's will be sharper, but the Canon's AF will be much more accurate.

Personally, if I had to compromise on IQ or AF, it'd be on IQ all day long.

Click to expand...

I will tell you that I owned the sigma 35 and the canon 35 is. The sigma focused pretty much as accurately as the Canon and was much sharper. I wish I still had it but I couldn't afford to keep it.

diness said:

I will tell you that I owned the sigma 35 and the canon 35 is. The sigma focused pretty much as accurately as the Canon and was much sharper. I wish I still had it but I couldn't afford to keep it.

Click to expand...

May be so on the 6D, but the Sigma is utterly useless on the 5D IV - it's a risk you've always got to accept with 3rd party equipment.

I've currently got it with my flashes - love my Godox units, think they're brilliant - but the AF assist on them doesn't work presently with the 5D IV, and no news on a firmware update.

I totally agree with you: If I'd be looking for a 35 or 85 mm prime I'd get the Canon version for sure (f1.8 or 1.4) but Canon has a 50mm lens lineup that is very bad and needs to be updated as soon as possible, and so people are looking elsewhere for a prime with that focal length.

I watched Dustin Abbott's review of the Tamron 45mm f1.8, and he really like it, in fact it is the 50mm prime lens he decided to add to his kit for his personal photography. He did mention he chose that lens over the Sigma f1.4 Art because of the inconsistent AF he experienced with it.

I will definitely check out other reviews on the AF performance of both lenses, Thanks again for your advice

Yeah I've seen Dustin's review - he's certainly a fan of it!

It's one of those things that I probably need to take a step back from. For me, AF speed & accuracy is absolute key requirement, hence potentially being hypercritical on the Sigma's & Tamron's. I looked at the Tamron 35 & 85 - both great lenses by all accounts, but not as fast on the AF.

I guess the same could be said for the 50. Canon desperately needs to release a new 50mm, but for me, the 50mm 1.2 L does a cracking job.

Whilst there is no perfect lens, I guess this at least shows us there is some healthy competition at present!