First comparison between Sigma 56 and Canon 50STM

Started 3 months ago | Discussions
Alastair Norcross Veteran Member • Posts: 7,177
First comparison between Sigma 56 and Canon 50STM
17

I managed to do some quick comparison shots between these two lenses (though my cat kept trying to help, somewhat slowing me). I shot the same scene (approximately--blame my cat for any differences) wide open (F1.4 on Sigma, F1.8 on Canon), at F2, and at F2.8. I used small spot focus on the left (as you look at it) eye. I processed them in Lightroom using my default processing, with lens corrections applied (LR has the profile for the Sigma as well as the Canon). Here they are, Canon first of each pair:

Canon F1.8

Sigma F1.4

Canon F2

Sigma F2

Canon F2.8

Sigma F2.8

More to come when I have time.

-- hide signature --

As the length of a thread approaches 150, the probability that someone will make the obvious "it's not the camera, it's the photographer" remark approaches 1.
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile

 Alastair Norcross's gear list:Alastair Norcross's gear list
Canon G7 X II Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS M6 Canon EOS M6 II Canon PowerShot S100 (2000) +26 more
robbert100 Contributing Member • Posts: 702
Re: First comparison between Sigma 56 and Canon 50STM

Thank you Alastair!

It looks like the Sigma is a winner (it has to be for 4 times the costs of the 50-1.8 STMĀ  )

-- hide signature --

Best regards,
Rob
www.namaqualand.wordpress.com

 robbert100's gear list:robbert100's gear list
Canon EOS M Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS M10 Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM +2 more
MAC Forum Pro • Posts: 14,896
Re: First comparison between Sigma 56 and Canon 50STM

Thanks Alastair

This matches my pre-conceived impressions of the two

I can see light white/blue yarn threads on the left eye of the bear for the sigma @ f1.4; whereas it takes f2.8 on the canon 50 to see the yarn hairs

I'm assuming that is where you focused.

Are you using RAW/DPP/DLO? Can you share your sharpness settings - since I'm seeing that the m6ii starts off softer than other cameras (eg, M50) before sharpening

 MAC's gear list:MAC's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS Rebel T7i Canon EOS RP +12 more
OP Alastair Norcross Veteran Member • Posts: 7,177
Re: First comparison between Sigma 56 and Canon 50STM
4

robbert100 wrote:

Thank you Alastair!

It looks like the Sigma is a winner (it has to be for 4 times the costs of the 50-1.8 STM )

I agree. From this quick test, the Sigma looks better at F1.4 than the Canon does at F2.8. The Canon is a fine lens for the money. It's pretty sharp, small, and light. Even with the adapter, it's not much bigger than the Sigma, and feels about the same weight (I haven't looked up the exact comparison). But the Sigma, so far at least, is simply superb. I would put it on a par with the Canon 32 F1.4. It's made to be shot wide open, and doesn't seem to suffer from it at all. Focusing is fast, quiet, and smooth. Lenses like the Sigma 56 and Canon 32 are the reason why you don't need to go full frame for great image quality. You can get all the performance advantages of the M6II over the R or RP, and get great image quality.

-- hide signature --

As the length of a thread approaches 150, the probability that someone will make the obvious "it's not the camera, it's the photographer" remark approaches 1.
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile

 Alastair Norcross's gear list:Alastair Norcross's gear list
Canon G7 X II Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS M6 Canon EOS M6 II Canon PowerShot S100 (2000) +26 more
OP Alastair Norcross Veteran Member • Posts: 7,177
Re: First comparison between Sigma 56 and Canon 50STM

MAC wrote:

Thanks Alastair

This matches my pre-conceived impressions of the two

I can see light white/blue yarn threads on the left eye of the bear for the sigma @ f1.4; whereas it takes f2.8 on the canon 50 to see the yarn hairs

I'm assuming that is where you focused.

Yes, I focused on the left eye as you look at it (the bear's right eye).

Are you using RAW/DPP/DLO? Can you share your sharpness settings - since I'm seeing that the m6ii starts off softer than other cameras (eg, M50) before sharpening

I shot these RAW (C-RAW) and used Lightroom for conversion, which is my standard workflow, except for sports, which I shoot in JPEG. I have LR set up to apply settings automatically on import, depending on the camera and ISO. These include some shadow and highlight recovery, and small amounts of texture, clarity, dehaze, and vibrance. I use the Adobe color profile, and, since getting the M6II and using the AutoW WB setting, I use the "as shot" setting for WB (which I change as needed). I'm at work now, but I can give you a rough idea of the sharpness settings in LR. Amount is around 90, threshold is minimum (0.5, I think), detail is 75 (which leans the sharpening to deconvolution sharpening), and mask is 75. I always apply a large mask setting, to prevent sharpening of OOF areas and noise. The detail setting allows you to use pure USM sharpening (at 0), pure deconvolution sharpening (at 100), or a mixture. 50 gives you a roughly even mix. I like to use more deconvolution than USM, but that's a matter of taste.

Edit: And I used LR's lens profiles for both Canon and Sigma lenses.

-- hide signature --

As the length of a thread approaches 150, the probability that someone will make the obvious "it's not the camera, it's the photographer" remark approaches 1.
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile

 Alastair Norcross's gear list:Alastair Norcross's gear list
Canon G7 X II Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS M6 Canon EOS M6 II Canon PowerShot S100 (2000) +26 more
MAC Forum Pro • Posts: 14,896
Re: First comparison between Sigma 56 and Canon 50STM

Alastair Norcross wrote:

MAC wrote:

Thanks Alastair

This matches my pre-conceived impressions of the two

I can see light white/blue yarn threads on the left eye of the bear for the sigma @ f1.4; whereas it takes f2.8 on the canon 50 to see the yarn hairs

I'm assuming that is where you focused.

Yes, I focused on the left eye as you look at it (the bear's right eye).

Are you using RAW/DPP/DLO? Can you share your sharpness settings - since I'm seeing that the m6ii starts off softer than other cameras (eg, M50) before sharpening

I shot these RAW (C-RAW) and used Lightroom for conversion, which is my standard workflow, except for sports, which I shoot in JPEG. I have LR set up to apply settings automatically on import, depending on the camera and ISO. These include some shadow and highlight recovery, and small amounts of texture, clarity, dehaze, and vibrance. I use the Adobe color profile, and, since getting the M6II and using the AutoW WB setting, I use the "as shot" setting for WB (which I change as needed). I'm at work now, but I can give you a rough idea of the sharpness settings in LR. Amount is around 90, threshold is minimum (0.5, I think), detail is 75 (which leans the sharpening to deconvolution sharpening), and mask is 75. I always apply a large mask setting, to prevent sharpening of OOF areas and noise. The detail setting allows you to use pure USM sharpening (at 0), pure deconvolution sharpening (at 100), or a mixture. 50 gives you a roughly even mix. I like to use more deconvolution than USM, but that's a matter of taste.

Edit: And I used LR's lens profiles for both Canon and Sigma lenses.

I think you are on to something big   - the 32 and 56 appear at first brush to have distinct value propositions in smaller size and IQ for less money than the bigger L's and R system.

Some things I'm trying to determine:

-- hide signature --

see the following link -- I'm a bit concerned about softness of the m6ii vs m50 and how to sharpen without increasing noise.  It appears they lowered the raw conversion sharpening and might have a heavier filter than the prior models

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Camera-Noise.aspx?Camera=1446&Test=0&ISO=100&CameraComp=1186&TestComp=0&ISOComp=0

--are you seeing more fringing on these 2 lenses with the higher mpxl m6ii?

--optimization of colors, sharpness, noise  - isn't this best optimized with  1) DPP/DLO conversion  2) LR sharpening 3) LR noise redux ?

Thanks for your help

 MAC's gear list:MAC's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS Rebel T7i Canon EOS RP +12 more
Canochrome Regular Member • Posts: 272
Re: First comparison between Sigma 56 and Canon 50STM
2

The best I can see on quick observation is that the Siggy 56 is very sharp at f/1.4, whereas the Canon STM needs to be stopped down a bit. At f/2.8, they are a lot closer to one another.

Bokeh on both appears smooth, no harsh edges, though a different scenario with a more contrasty background might show different results.

The 50 STM has a couple of things going for it - it's very inexpensive, and it's a reliable age-old design with good lens coatings and modern manufacturing processes.

-- hide signature --

Tom

 Canochrome's gear list:Canochrome's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS R Canon EOS RP Canon EOS M6 II Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye +20 more
OP Alastair Norcross Veteran Member • Posts: 7,177
Re: First comparison between Sigma 56 and Canon 50STM

MAC wrote:

Alastair Norcross wrote:

MAC wrote:

Thanks Alastair

This matches my pre-conceived impressions of the two

I can see light white/blue yarn threads on the left eye of the bear for the sigma @ f1.4; whereas it takes f2.8 on the canon 50 to see the yarn hairs

I'm assuming that is where you focused.

Yes, I focused on the left eye as you look at it (the bear's right eye).

Are you using RAW/DPP/DLO? Can you share your sharpness settings - since I'm seeing that the m6ii starts off softer than other cameras (eg, M50) before sharpening

I shot these RAW (C-RAW) and used Lightroom for conversion, which is my standard workflow, except for sports, which I shoot in JPEG. I have LR set up to apply settings automatically on import, depending on the camera and ISO. These include some shadow and highlight recovery, and small amounts of texture, clarity, dehaze, and vibrance. I use the Adobe color profile, and, since getting the M6II and using the AutoW WB setting, I use the "as shot" setting for WB (which I change as needed). I'm at work now, but I can give you a rough idea of the sharpness settings in LR. Amount is around 90, threshold is minimum (0.5, I think), detail is 75 (which leans the sharpening to deconvolution sharpening), and mask is 75. I always apply a large mask setting, to prevent sharpening of OOF areas and noise. The detail setting allows you to use pure USM sharpening (at 0), pure deconvolution sharpening (at 100), or a mixture. 50 gives you a roughly even mix. I like to use more deconvolution than USM, but that's a matter of taste.

Edit: And I used LR's lens profiles for both Canon and Sigma lenses.

I think you are on to something big - the 32 and 56 appear at first brush to have distinct value propositions in smaller size and IQ for less money than the bigger L's and R system.

Some things I'm trying to determine:

It looks like it didn't copy the text you had below the signature. Anyway, the results from that link certainly don't reflect what I'm getting with my M6II, compared with my M6 (I don't have the M50). I'm not sure what lens was used for those noise tests, but it looks like it either wasn't very sharp, or wasn't focused properly. I'm getting better sharpness out of the M6II than the M6 (which is very good). Perhaps you'd get the very best results by first using DPP, and then LR. I really dislike the experience of DPP, so I don't use it. For me, LR does very well indeed. If you use a fair bit of deconvolution sharpening, and use LR's lens profiles, I think any advantage of the much longer processing workflow of DPP plus LR would be minimal. So far, I've found the M6II to be a step up from the M6 in every respect, and several steps up in some.

-- hide signature --

As the length of a thread approaches 150, the probability that someone will make the obvious "it's not the camera, it's the photographer" remark approaches 1.
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile

 Alastair Norcross's gear list:Alastair Norcross's gear list
Canon G7 X II Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS M6 Canon EOS M6 II Canon PowerShot S100 (2000) +26 more
MAC Forum Pro • Posts: 14,896
Re: First comparison between Sigma 56 and Canon 50STM

Alastair Norcross wrote:

MAC wrote:

Alastair Norcross wrote:

MAC wrote:

Thanks Alastair

This matches my pre-conceived impressions of the two

I can see light white/blue yarn threads on the left eye of the bear for the sigma @ f1.4; whereas it takes f2.8 on the canon 50 to see the yarn hairs

I'm assuming that is where you focused.

Yes, I focused on the left eye as you look at it (the bear's right eye).

Are you using RAW/DPP/DLO? Can you share your sharpness settings - since I'm seeing that the m6ii starts off softer than other cameras (eg, M50) before sharpening

I shot these RAW (C-RAW) and used Lightroom for conversion, which is my standard workflow, except for sports, which I shoot in JPEG. I have LR set up to apply settings automatically on import, depending on the camera and ISO. These include some shadow and highlight recovery, and small amounts of texture, clarity, dehaze, and vibrance. I use the Adobe color profile, and, since getting the M6II and using the AutoW WB setting, I use the "as shot" setting for WB (which I change as needed). I'm at work now, but I can give you a rough idea of the sharpness settings in LR. Amount is around 90, threshold is minimum (0.5, I think), detail is 75 (which leans the sharpening to deconvolution sharpening), and mask is 75. I always apply a large mask setting, to prevent sharpening of OOF areas and noise. The detail setting allows you to use pure USM sharpening (at 0), pure deconvolution sharpening (at 100), or a mixture. 50 gives you a roughly even mix. I like to use more deconvolution than USM, but that's a matter of taste.

Edit: And I used LR's lens profiles for both Canon and Sigma lenses.

I think you are on to something big - the 32 and 56 appear at first brush to have distinct value propositions in smaller size and IQ for less money than the bigger L's and R system.

Some things I'm trying to determine:

It looks like it didn't copy the text you had below the signature. Anyway, the results from that link certainly don't reflect what I'm getting with my M6II, compared with my M6 (I don't have the M50). I'm not sure what lens was used for those noise tests, but it looks like it either wasn't very sharp, or wasn't focused properly. I'm getting better sharpness out of the M6II than the M6 (which is very good).

Good to know, thanks

Perhaps you'd get the very best results by first using DPP, and then LR.

I have the last classic version 6.14, so looking at what my workflow would be

I really dislike the experience of DPP, so I don't use it. For me, LR does very well indeed. If you use a fair bit of deconvolution sharpening, and use LR's lens profiles, I think any advantage of the much longer processing workflow of DPP plus LR would be minimal. So far, I've found the M6II to be a step up from the M6 in every respect, and several steps up in some.

sounds good!  Any issues with speed lights or flash triggers?  I have 580exII, 550's and odin triggers

 MAC's gear list:MAC's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS Rebel T7i Canon EOS RP +12 more
Mirfak Senior Member • Posts: 1,485
Re: First comparison between Sigma 56 and Canon 50STM

Canochrome wrote:

The best I can see on quick observation is that the Siggy 56 is very sharp at f/1.4, whereas the Canon STM needs to be stopped down a bit. At f/2.8, they are a lot closer to one another.

I agree. The Canon is ok at f1.8 if you're interested in only the central part of the image. But the lens is best at 2.8 and slower (I don't use mine below f2.8).

Bokeh on both appears smooth, no harsh edges, though a different scenario with a more contrasty background might show different results.

The 50 STM has a couple of things going for it - it's very inexpensive, and it's a reliable age-old design with good lens coatings and modern manufacturing processes.

Yes. I don't really need anything more than the Canon, but it's great to have choices (and native mounting to boot).

Alexsfo Senior Member • Posts: 2,326
Re: First comparison between Sigma 56 and Canon 50STM
3

These are close up shots where the difference isnt as significant. Most lenses perform much better at close ups.

It will be interesting to see more of background; can you place the subject further away from the camera so the background fills most of the image? and also subject to the left and to the right of the frame. Based on the above examples, 50stm seems like a better value especially for those who already have the adapter.

Of course we are still waiting for video performance comparison - AF, noise, digital IS.

 Alexsfo's gear list:Alexsfo's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS M6 II Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM Canon EF 35mm F2 IS USM Canon EF 24-70mm F4L IS USM +4 more
MAC Forum Pro • Posts: 14,896
Re: First comparison between Sigma 56 and Canon 50STM

Alexsfo wrote:

Based on the above examples, 50stm seems like a better value especially for those who already have the adapter.

you've got to be kidding?

 MAC's gear list:MAC's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS Rebel T7i Canon EOS RP +12 more
MAC Forum Pro • Posts: 14,896
Re: First comparison between Sigma 56 and Canon 50STM

Mirfak wrote:

Canochrome wrote:

The best I can see on quick observation is that the Siggy 56 is very sharp at f/1.4, whereas the Canon STM needs to be stopped down a bit. At f/2.8, they are a lot closer to one another.

I agree. The Canon is ok at f1.8 if you're interested in only the central part of the image.

It's not ok

But the lens is best at 2.8 and slower (I don't use mine below f2.8).

that's no fun

Bokeh on both appears smooth, no harsh edges, though a different scenario with a more contrasty background might show different results.

The 50 STM has a couple of things going for it - it's very inexpensive, and it's a reliable age-old design with good lens coatings and modern manufacturing processes.

Yes. I don't really need anything more than the Canon, but it's great to have choices (and native mounting to boot).

hmm, no need for shallow dof?

 MAC's gear list:MAC's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS Rebel T7i Canon EOS RP +12 more
Alexsfo Senior Member • Posts: 2,326
Re: First comparison between Sigma 56 and Canon 50STM
7

MAC wrote:

Alexsfo wrote:

Based on the above examples, 50stm seems like a better value especially for those who already have the adapter.

you've got to be kidding?

not kidding; $100 vs $479. STM is not 4+ times worse than Sigma and at least you know it will be fully supported by Canon should you upgrade firmware or camera. Need to see more comparisons though.

 Alexsfo's gear list:Alexsfo's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS M6 II Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM Canon EF 35mm F2 IS USM Canon EF 24-70mm F4L IS USM +4 more
MAC Forum Pro • Posts: 14,896
Re: First comparison between Sigma 56 and Canon 50STM
3

Alexsfo wrote:

MAC wrote:

Alexsfo wrote:

Based on the above examples, 50stm seems like a better value especially for those who already have the adapter.

you've got to be kidding?

not kidding; $100 vs $479. STM is not 4+ times worse than Sigma and at least you know it will be fully supported by Canon should you upgrade firmware or camera. Need to see more comparisons though.

in photography, $479 vs $100 is a small price to pay for f1.4 SHARP WIDE OPEN with very good backdrop blur to remove the clutter!!!

 MAC's gear list:MAC's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS Rebel T7i Canon EOS RP +12 more
OP Alastair Norcross Veteran Member • Posts: 7,177
Re: First comparison between Sigma 56 and Canon 50STM
3

Alexsfo wrote:

These are close up shots where the difference isnt as significant. Most lenses perform much better at close ups.

It will be interesting to see more of background; can you place the subject further away from the camera so the background fills most of the image? and also subject to the left and to the right of the frame.

I’ll see what I can do. I’ve shot enough mid-range shots with the Sigma already to know that it performs excellently on those too.

Based on the above examples, 50stm seems like a better value especially for those who already have the adapter.

I’m not sure about that. For a top quality fast prime, $479 is actually quite cheap. The Canon is a lot cheaper, but usually 2/3 stop and considerably better wide open sharpness is going to cost you a lot more than $379 extra. Look at the difference in price between the 85 F1.8 and the 85 F1.4L. The 85 F1.8 is actually closer in performance to the L than the 50STM is to the Sigma. Having seen these results, I know I would never be satisfied shooting the Canon again on an M.

Of course we are still waiting for video performance comparison - AF, noise, digital IS.

Someone else will have to do those. I have no interest in video.

-- hide signature --

As the length of a thread approaches 150, the probability that someone will make the obvious "it's not the camera, it's the photographer" remark approaches 1.
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile

 Alastair Norcross's gear list:Alastair Norcross's gear list
Canon G7 X II Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS M6 Canon EOS M6 II Canon PowerShot S100 (2000) +26 more
Abu Mahendra Veteran Member • Posts: 5,310
Re: First comparison between Sigma 56 and Canon 50STM

Not quite, professor. Those are great lenses, but you should see the crisp output of the R's 30MP at high ISO. The ergonomics, the EVF, the battery life. Yeah...not quite.

-- hide signature --

>> I'm already lovin' my Canon 35IS lens! <<

 Abu Mahendra's gear list:Abu Mahendra's gear list
Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM Canon EF 70-200mm F4L IS USM Canon EF 24-70mm F2.8L II USM Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM +5 more
OP Alastair Norcross Veteran Member • Posts: 7,177
Re: First comparison between Sigma 56 and Canon 50STM
3

Abu Mahendra wrote:

Not quite, professor. Those are great lenses, but you should see the crisp output of the R's 30MP at high ISO. The ergonomics, the EVF, the battery life. Yeah...not quite.

This doesn’t contradict what I said. For me the marginal gains in IQ from the R are outweighed by the many other advantages of the M6II. As for ergonomics, I prefer the M. EVF is pretty close. Battery life may be better on the R, but it’s plenty good enough on the M6II.

-- hide signature --

As the length of a thread approaches 150, the probability that someone will make the obvious "it's not the camera, it's the photographer" remark approaches 1.
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile

 Alastair Norcross's gear list:Alastair Norcross's gear list
Canon G7 X II Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS M6 Canon EOS M6 II Canon PowerShot S100 (2000) +26 more
nnowak Veteran Member • Posts: 6,016
Finally!
2

It appears as though the Sigma is finally the answer for a sorely needed portrait lens on the M system.  I knew it would not take much to beat the 50mm STM wide open, but I am surprised how much better the Sigma is even at f/2.8.

Thank you for the samples.  The lens looks great!

MAC Forum Pro • Posts: 14,896
Re: Finally!

nnowak wrote:

It appears as though the Sigma is finally the answer for a sorely needed portrait lens on the M system. I knew it would not take much to beat the 50mm STM wide open, but I am surprised how much better the Sigma is even at f/2.8.

Thank you for the samples. The lens looks great!

I’m not an easy sell, but this leads me to buy m6ii

first lens will be 32

second lens will be 56

and then the 11-22

then the 16

4 lenses, no adaption

sell the 50 stm and some other gear

just waiting for Black Friday - cyber monday

no interest in the more expensive R

 MAC's gear list:MAC's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS Rebel T7i Canon EOS RP +12 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads