# Review: LensTip gushes over the Sigma 50-100 f/1.8



## ahsanford (Apr 26, 2016)

LensTip loves the 50-100 f/1.8:
http://www.lenstip.com/473.1-Lens_review-Sigma_A_50-100_mm_f_1.8_DC_HSM.html

_"It’s really difficult to find the right words in order to describe the results. The new Sigma is absurdly sharp. At the beginning of this chapter we wrote that the best lenses, tested on the 50D, are able to reach near 55 lpmm. In the shorter range of focal lengths the Sigma is able to go as high as them…being wide open! It is an incredible achievement, especially if you take into account the fact that you deal here with a zoom lens! What’s more, by f/2.8 and across the whole focal range the lens gets record-breaking results amounting to 59 lpmm. So far we haven’t tested a more outstanding device designed to work with APS-C/DX sensors…"_

- A


----------



## chrysoberyl (Apr 26, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> LensTip loves the 50-100 f/1.8:
> http://www.lenstip.com/473.1-Lens_review-Sigma_A_50-100_mm_f_1.8_DC_HSM.html
> 
> _"It’s really difficult to find the right words in order to describe the results. The new Sigma is absurdly sharp. At the beginning of this chapter we wrote that the best lenses, tested on the 50D, are able to reach near 55 lpmm. In the shorter range of focal lengths the Sigma is able to go as high as them…being wide open! It is an incredible achievement, especially if you take into account the fact that you deal here with a zoom lens! What’s more, by f/2.8 and across the whole focal range the lens gets record-breaking results amounting to 59 lpmm. So far we haven’t tested a more outstanding device designed to work with APS-C/DX sensors…"_
> ...



Thank you. What a thing to put on my 80D...


----------



## Pookie (Apr 26, 2016)

dilbert said:


> Yeah, but it has a tripod foot that you can't remove so therefore it suxor. Now if Canon had made it...



Time to stop drinking...


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 26, 2016)

I'm wondering about the focal length. Weird!!

As for gushing, if you want to get free samples, you need to give good reviews.

"Let me thank here the Sigma Corporation headquarters and its Polish subsidiary Sigma ProCentrum for sending us the final specimen of the lens, tested here, in a truly record time."


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 26, 2016)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> As for gushing, if you want to get free samples, you need to give good reviews.
> 
> "Let me thank here the Sigma Corporation headquarters and its Polish subsidiary Sigma ProCentrum for sending us the final specimen of the lens, tested here, in a truly record time."



I use that logic on camera bag and camera strap reviews, especially the fancy/luxe leather stuff they sell for weaponized plutonium prices. Those companies famously gift gear to reviewers for a positive influence on the outcome. (Hint: try to find a bad review of a $600 distressed leather bag or some leather camera suspenders that 'pair well with a nice handlebar mustache'. Good luck with that.)

Lenses are a shade different. Though it's only an N of 1 and the repeatability/reproducibility of the testing is low, I don't think that changes the results they publish. That _actually is_ the highest resolving APS-C lens they've ever tested.

Now did they sprinkle some flowery verbiage in there? Sure. But I trust their data. (...on one lens, on one camera, etc... :)

- A


----------



## chrysoberyl (Apr 26, 2016)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I'm wondering about the focal length. Weird!!
> 
> As for gushing, if you want to get free samples, you need to give good reviews.
> 
> "Let me thank here the Sigma Corporation headquarters and its Polish subsidiary Sigma ProCentrum for sending us the final specimen of the lens, tested here, in a truly record time."



So the well-known reviewers get free copies? Photozone, The Digital Picture, etc.?


----------



## Viggo (Apr 26, 2016)

chrysoberyl said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > I'm wondering about the focal length. Weird!!
> ...



The digital picture doesn't , you can see it in the reviews that they buy them retail, and often publish the results of two or three different copies in the Lens Quality comparison.


----------



## AlanF (Apr 26, 2016)

chrysoberyl said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > I'm wondering about the focal length. Weird!!
> ...



Don't bad mouth The Digital Picture - read the site information:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/

"Unless otherwise specified, all reviewed products are straight from a retailer. Being completely manufacturer-independent, we have the freedom to tell you exactly what we think of each item. In turn, we count on you using the links on this site to make your purchases for our support."


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 26, 2016)

chrysoberyl said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > I'm wondering about the focal length. Weird!!
> ...



PhotoZone is loaned or donated I believe.

Bryan Carnathan at TDP actually buys his gear, though I imagine his sort-of-partnership with LensRentals is an easy way to suss out copy to copy variations if he sees something out of the ordinary.

My short read is this: it's hard to put a bad spin on a great test or a good spin on a bad test. But it's trivial to say something you that can't really test -- like a camera bag, tripod, etc. -- is amaaaaazing.

So if you say something great about a camera or lens that's beyond what you recorded, with 100% likelihood the good nerdy people of the internet are going to call you on it because they have other sources. Ask DXO. They make inane and inconsistent conclusions for a living, and they can't even take a p--- without people calling them on their nonsense.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 26, 2016)

But let the record show this thread is more about how well the 50-100 f/1.8 tested, not the glowing words LensTip chose to use.

My fault for leading the witness(es) on that front. That lens tested pret-ty damn well, didn't it?

- A


----------



## chrysoberyl (Apr 26, 2016)

Don't bad mouth The Digital Picture - read the site information:
[/quote]

I bad-mouthed no one; I merely asked a question. And apparently touched a nerve. However, I don't believe everything I read on the web, especially disclaimers.

I do apologize for straying off-topic.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 26, 2016)

chrysoberyl said:


> I bad-mouthed no one; I merely asked a question. And apparently touched a nerve. However, I don't believe everything I read on the web, especially disclaimers.
> 
> I do apologize for straying off-topic.



People flock to bash DXO and people flock to defend Bryan Carnathan. That's what we do.

I love the TDP site -- I'm there daily, it seems -- but I once implied that Bryan Carnathan is slightly more critical of third party product than Canon product, said something like 'I can't recall the last time he poo-pooed a Canon lens', 'If everything Canon gets an A, it's hard to tell the so-so Canon products from the awesome ones', etc. and I was promptly stomped by the (usually) kind people of this forum.

Still, all in all, these are good folks compared to the gen pop of other forums and posting locations.

- A


----------



## Refurb7 (Apr 26, 2016)

It looks like a very fine lens. Might be great for outdoor sports. But for indoor photography I would need image stabilization.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Apr 26, 2016)

I'm using and reviewing the 50-100 right now, and I have to say that Lens Tip may not be exaggerating here. The lens (other than the stupid tripod collar design) may be the best of the ART series. Not only is it super sharp, but so far the autofocus seems to be the best of the bunch despite this being a very demanding focal length.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 26, 2016)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> I'm using and reviewing the 50-100 right now, and I have to say that Lens Tip may not be exaggerating here. The lens (other than the stupid tripod collar design) may be the best of the ART series. Not only is it super sharp, but so far the autofocus seems to be the best of the bunch despite this being a very demanding focal length.



Dustin, please post AF hit rates when shot wide open if you can! Lens Tip dabbles at this but isn't very specific with their methods. Consistency of AF on wider aperture glass is what always has my money go to Canon instead of Sigma. Would love to see data on newer Sigma offerings to see how they are improving.

- A


----------



## slclick (Apr 26, 2016)

I put Lenstip in the same bucket with Petapixel for reviews. Fluff and not enough...enough. I wait for TDP, Roger and Dustin for my reviews.


----------



## AlanF (Apr 26, 2016)

Lenstip's measurements are fine. They are just over-polite.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 27, 2016)

chrysoberyl said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > I'm wondering about the focal length. Weird!!
> ...



No, they may borrow or buy them, but refuse to take loaners from the lens manufacturers. As far as I know, lens tip does not pull punches when reviewing a lens, if its bad, they may just not publish the review, we would never know. 

In any event, testing a lens provided by the manufacturer always causes me to wonder if it was a typical sample. A manufacturer tests every lens multiple times during the manufacturing process. Its possible that occasionally, they find one that is near perfect and set it aside or mark it as one to show the maximum capability of a lens if it is perfectly adjusted, even if its one in a thousand.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 27, 2016)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> chrysoberyl said:
> 
> 
> > Mt Spokane Photography said:
> ...



Agree, LensTip is not always kind. 

Also keep in mind that they are the only show in town (that I'm aware of) that has some form of standardized testing on AF speed/hit rate and coma performance. That is useful.

But it bears repeating that I started this thread about some lights out resolution testing and not that LensTip said disproportionately nice things... :

- A


----------



## Pixel (Apr 27, 2016)

Tell you what, I'm absolutely gushing about the 18-35 f1.8A. Makes me want to try this lens even more now.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Apr 27, 2016)

I can't speak for other reviewers, but I certainly don't get free copies of lenses. Some of them have VIP programs for discounted prices should we want to purchase, but I primarily review loaners.


----------



## Luds34 (Apr 27, 2016)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I'm wondering about the focal length. Weird!!



I know some are quite excited for this lens. I don't really get the focal length either. All in a relatively narrow, in-the-shorter telephoto range (APS-C). I guess I'd rather just use a fast prime.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 27, 2016)

Luds34 said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > I'm wondering about the focal length. Weird!!
> ...



As with the 18-35 f/1.8 for crop being followed with a 24-35 f/2 for FF, I expect this lens is batting practice for Sigma to offer an f/2 zoom for FF. It will be nutty, like a 75 - 110 f/2, but I think they are going to do it.

- A


----------



## slclick (Apr 27, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > Mt Spokane Photography said:
> ...



I already have an f/2 zoom from Sigma and it replaces 3 primes. Sure it's wide and not for everyone but those it's good for, it's great for.


----------



## wsmith96 (Apr 27, 2016)

Luds34 said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > I'm wondering about the focal length. Weird!!
> ...



I'm guessing that this would fit the needs of portrait photographers using aps-c cameras. It seems to be tailored for that with the focal length provided. The sample pictures are pretty impressive.


----------



## Sharlin (Apr 27, 2016)

wsmith96 said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > Mt Spokane Photography said:
> ...



Right. Plus shooting the sorts of events, action and sports where you can be pretty close to your subjects. Basically it's a 70-200mm f/2.8 for crop sensors, with a bit less reach. And seeing how popular 70-200s are...


----------

