# Canon 50 1.2 vs Sigma 50 Art for AI Servo



## Ryan_ (Jun 16, 2016)

Hello,

The only 50mm lens I've owned is the Canon 50 1.8. I have used the Canon 50 1.2L (borrowed) but it was on land and the subject was essentially still.

What I use the lens for 95% of the time is shooting waves in the water. When the wave gets closer than say a car length away, the focus accuracy goes out the window. Further than that, and its pretty decent at tracking a wave approaching me in AI Servo, though certainly not perfect. But I've been using this lens for years, as its been getting the job done, but more and more, I am ending up with too many out of focus "would be" shots. Now shooting from the water has its own set of challenges that absolutely can and will affect how your camera/lens focus. However I've been doing it for a couple years or so now and I've gotten better at minimizing those challenges.

So my question is, which of these two lenses would be better at autofocusing a moving subject that is approaching me in AI Servo mode, especially once the subject starts getting closer? I of course know about the Sigma "issues" with focusing, but my question still stands, as I've heard/read many things about the Canon 50 1.2 as well.


----------



## niels123 (Jun 16, 2016)

Does it have to be a 50mm? I own both the 50 art and the new 35 f/1.4L II and I think the 35 is stellar with AF performance. Optically it's very good, better than the 50A. The AF problem on the 50A is not its tracking speed, in facts that should be sufficient on a 5D III or 7D II, but about 1 in 10 shots is (slightly) out of focus, even for still subjects.


----------



## Ryan_ (Jun 16, 2016)

niels123 said:


> Does it have to be a 50mm? I own both the 50 art and the new 35 f/1.4L II and I think the 35 is stellar with AF performance. Optically it's very good, better than the 50A. The AF problem on the 50A is not its tracking speed, in facts that should be sufficient on a 5D III or 7D II, but about 1 in 10 shots is (slightly) out of focus, even for still subjects.


Yes I would say 50mm is my favorite FL in the water, that and 85mm. I have the old 35 f/2 (non IS) as well, which I use rarely. I just don't like 35mm lens very much.

I am using these on 5d3. And honestly, I do get a good amount of OOF shots from the 50 1.8 in AI Servo as it is. So another question would be for anyone with that experience, or anyone willing to take a gander, is the Sigma 50 ART at least better than the Canon 50 1.8 in terms of keeping in focus during AI Servo? I would think the obvious answer be yes, but not sure with all the bad report about its AF.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jun 16, 2016)

I've never found the 50L AF in servo to be that great either. Granted, I typically use it in low light situations anyway, so the targets tend to be low contrast anyway. However, I find that the servo AF in the 24-70 f/2.8 II (indoor volleyball and basketball) is so much better than the original 35L and Canon 50 f/1.4 and 50L. Part of that might be due to differences in DOF, but the 24-70 II focuses much faster and tracks targets much better. Might be worth looking into if you can live with the max aperture of f/2.8.


----------



## TeT (Jun 16, 2016)

Have you used the new 50 1.8 STM? or just the Nifty II?

Didn't the focus quality drastically improve with the new STM? It is cheap and may hold you over until the Canon 50 1.4 II IS ?? comes out...


----------



## Ryan_ (Jun 16, 2016)

Random Orbits said:


> I've never found the 50L AF in servo to be that great either. Granted, I typically use it in low light situations anyway, so the targets tend to be low contrast anyway. However, I find that the servo AF in the 24-70 f/2.8 II (indoor volleyball and basketball) is so much better than the original 35L and Canon 50 f/1.4 and 50L. Part of that might be due to differences in DOF, but the 24-70 II focuses much faster and tracks targets much better. Might be worth looking into if you can live with the max aperture of f/2.8.


That is definitely an option (24-70), one I hadn't considered. The only problem is the weight. And me baby-ing that lens. I rented that lens, and then bought it because I loved it, and my 24-105 was having problems. It is so sharp, and fast, it is definitely my workhorse outside of the water. The 2.8 doesnt bother me much. I never really shoot below that on my 85/50mm because I can never get a sharp photo out of it when they're that open (on land I can). On the plus side, I already have the lens, all I'd need is the port for my water housing.
Definitely something I will consider. Thanks


----------



## Ryan_ (Jun 16, 2016)

TeT said:


> Have you used the new 50 1.8 STM? or just the Nifty II?
> 
> Didn't the focus quality drastically improve with the new STM? It is cheap and may hold you over until the Canon 50 1.4 II IS ?? comes out...


Still rocking the Nifty II. The few reviews I've seen on it suggest at least a small improvement in AF, but not sure if it'll make a big difference in my situation. Think I'll have to check out more reviews to make a decision yet. I definitely wouldn't mind getting that lens if its focusing will work for me.


----------



## pj1974 (Jun 17, 2016)

Ryan_ said:


> TeT said:
> 
> 
> > Have you used the new 50 1.8 STM? or just the Nifty II?
> ...



I owned 2 copies of the 50mm f/1.8 II. It had really good IQ from f/2.5 onwards, but I got rid of both because of the terrible (slow, inaccurate, inconsistent, hunt-prone AF). Worst AF lens I’ve ever owned. Not that I expect it to focus like any of my USM lenses… but AF on the 50mm f/1.8 II was notably worse even than the old 18-55mm II (not IS) kit lens.

I bought the 50mm f/1.8 STM and AF performance is night and day different. Much faster. Accurate. Consistent. Reliable. Much less hunting in low light. 

I bought the 50mm STM to tie me over till Canon produce a 50mm f/whoknowswhat USM (hopefully with IS), or there is a viable 3rd party manufacturer who produces a 50mm that I want (there is currently not one on the market that really wins me over). The other reasons I love the 50mm STM is that it focuses much closer (MFD is smaller), has a notable increase in image quality (good from f/2.2 and really great from f/2.5). Additionally it has slightly better bokeh. 

Ryan_, it might be worth your while to do the same as I’ve done – and get the 50mm STM. I have only done ‘wave tracking’ from land (beach) – and never with my 50mm STM, but I think it would be up to it (though I’d probably still go with a USM lens for fast action AF AI Servo).

Regards

Paul


----------



## d (Jun 17, 2016)

pj1974 said:


> Ryan_, it might be worth your while to do the same as I’ve done – and get the 50mm STM. I have only done ‘wave tracking’ from land (beach) – and never with my 50mm STM, but I think it would be up to it (though I’d probably still go with a USM lens for fast action AF AI Servo).
> 
> Regards
> 
> Paul



Hey Ryan_,

I'm with Paul that the 50mm STM AF performance seems much better than the 50MM EF II. It's a pretty cheap lens so might be worth picking up a copy before worrying about a more expensive 50mm ART or the 1.2 Canon. I sold my 50A because of it's inaccurate AF performance, and now use the 50 STM as my 50 prime. I'm perfectly happy with it for the time being.

Cheers,
d.


----------



## Ryan_ (Jun 20, 2016)

Hi guys,

Thanks for all of the input. Definitely helped me in my consideration. I think I will try out the new Canon 50mm 1.8 STM. Money is definitely tight right now, and it seems to have overall solid reviews, from slightly improved IQ to more reliable AF.

Thank you again, much appreciated.


----------

