# 50mm lens. I Need advice!!



## GEEo (Aug 23, 2012)

Hey guys! thinking of getting a 50mm as my first "aftermarket" lens.

The Lenses I'm looking to pick up in about a month or so is the Canon 50mm f/1.4 or the Sigma 50mm f/1.4, or if its worth it I can wait and save a little bit more and get the Canon 50mm f/1.2 (MAYBE)

Sigma 50mm f/1.4 - I like the build quality and the size of the Sigma it feels sturdier compared to its canon counterpart and it doesn't look weird on my 7D. also the Sigma is a newer lens. The concerns I have about the Sigma is that some are having problem with the lens not working with the camera. also some focusing problems. and the lens I tried out on a local shop had a weird noise when focusing.

Canon 50mm f/1.4 - The build quality of the canon is not as sturdy as the sigma. if feels more plasticky and cheap. the Canon is almost half the size of the Sigma and it looks kinda weird on my 7D without the lens hood. but looks is not really a deciding factor for me. I know some of the canon 50mm f/1.4 have some focusing issues as well. the canon is almost silent compared to the Sigma when focusing. also the canon 50mm f/1.4 has been around for quite a while now I'm worried that if I do decide to pick up the canon a month or two later a version II comes out.

So which one should I get?


----------



## Random Orbits (Aug 23, 2012)

Sigma. If you get a good copy, it's performance will fall between the Canon f/1.4 and f/1.2 but at a price much closer to the f/1.4.

I wouldn't be concerned about the Canon 50 f/1.4 replacement coming out anytime soon, and if it did, are you willing to spend around $800 for similar performance? And if the new version does cost around 800, I'm pretty sure you'll get good resale for a sub-$400 lens once it is discontinued.


----------



## GEEo (Aug 23, 2012)

Random Orbits said:


> Sigma. If you get a good copy, it's performance will fall between the Canon f/1.4 and f/1.2 but at a price much closer to the f/1.4.
> 
> I wouldn't be concerned about the Canon 50 f/1.4 replacement coming out anytime soon, and if it did, are you willing to spend around $800 for similar performance? And if the new version does cost around 800, I'm pretty sure you'll get good resale for a sub-$400 lens once it is discontinued.



If I do decide to go with the Sigma how do I know that I have a good/bad copy?


----------



## Random Orbits (Aug 23, 2012)

GEEo said:


> Random Orbits said:
> 
> 
> > Sigma. If you get a good copy, it's performance will fall between the Canon f/1.4 and f/1.2 but at a price much closer to the f/1.4.
> ...



One of the things you should test with any lens is using the lens wide open (f/1.4 in this case) and setting up the microfocus adjustment on your 7D appropriately. Assuming that you don't have dedicated software for this, adjust the microfocus adjustment in increments of 4 initially to get it to a rough ballpark and then go finer in increments of 2. Choose a high contrast flat target in good light (i.e. stop sign) at a typical distance. A good lens would have a final MFA within the camera limits (i.e. +/-20), and a picture taken with AF and live view will show similar sharpness.


----------



## cliffwang (Aug 23, 2012)

GEEo said:


> Random Orbits said:
> 
> 
> > Sigma. If you get a good copy, it's performance will fall between the Canon f/1.4 and f/1.2 but at a price much closer to the f/1.4.
> ...



I just ordered Sigma 50mm F/1.4 and Tamron 24-70mm F/2.8 VC few days ago and will receive them in this two days. What I am going to do first is using FoCal to do MA. If the MA value is over than 10, I think I might ask an exchange. I finially is going to say bye-bye to my Canon 24-70mm. Remember you should just buy lens from big stores because they usually can do free exchange or return.

I actually don't hear focus issue for recent Sigma 50mm and your 7D has MA feature, so you shouldn't worry too much. Just buy it and try it. If you don't like it and then you can return it in usually 30 days.


----------



## RLPhoto (Aug 23, 2012)

GEEo said:


> Hey guys! thinking of getting a 50mm as my first "aftermarket" lens.
> 
> The Lenses I'm looking to pick up in about a month or so is the Canon 50mm f/1.4 or the Sigma 50mm f/1.4, or if its worth it I can wait and save a little bit more and get the Canon 50mm f/1.2 (MAYBE)
> 
> ...



From a 50MM addict like myself, I would wait on the 50L. Get the canon 50mm 1.4, Its a good lens and if you cant afford that the 50mm 1.8 is good as well.

I don't care for the rendering of the sigma.

The 50L is king for what it is.


----------



## Ryan708 (Aug 23, 2012)

Amazon lets you print a return label right from the site, and will have the new lens on it's way before you are done putting the one you got into a box. I like local and hate big faceless companies, but in a hit-and-miss situation like the sigma's are known for, it might be a good idea. Id own a sigma 30/1.4 if i wasnt thinking about going FF.


----------



## DB (Aug 23, 2012)

Neither.

On a crop-sensor body like the 7D you'd be better off getting the Canon EF 28mm f1.8 USM for 2 reasons:

(1) It's a better lens than the 50mm f1.4 in terms of IQ and has proper USM (far less noisy)

(2) More importantly, with the crop factor you have a 44.8mm (35mm equivalent) lens which is far less limiting than an effective 80mm focal length if you opt for the 50mm f1.4. Also remember the human eye lens is approx. 45mm

Lastly, you're better off starting with your 1st prime as a 'wide' lens, then beginning working your way up to longer focal lengths as your budget allows.


----------



## cliffwang (Aug 23, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> I don't care for the rendering of the sigma.
> 
> The 50L is king for what it is.


If 50mm F/1.2 L costs 450, I definitely will buy one.
Sigma 50mm F/1.4 or Canon 50mm F/1.4 which one is better choice? I pick Sigma 50mm F/1.4.


----------



## charlesa (Aug 23, 2012)

On a similar note, are there really any concerns with sharpness and softness of the 1.2 L at apertures of 1.2 to 1.8? Because you do not invest that amount in a lens if you will not be able to use it at its strong point. Yes, you might tell me the quality of the bokeh is buttery.... but well. Any users who have the 1.2 L can comment please?


----------



## RLPhoto (Aug 23, 2012)

charlesa said:


> On a similar note, are there really any concerns with sharpness and softness of the 1.2 L at apertures of 1.2 to 1.8? Because you do not invest that amount in a lens if you will not be able to use it at its strong point. Yes, you might tell me the quality of the bokeh is buttery.... but well. Any users who have the 1.2 L can comment please?



The 50L is the sharpest 50mm from 1.2-2.8 available for canon EOS mount. Done. 8) 

I will also pick the canon 50mm 1.4 > Sigma 50mm 1.4. Atleast the canon 50mm hits its target and its IQ is fine for what it is and at f/2 is perfect.


----------



## cliffwang (Aug 23, 2012)

DB said:


> Neither.
> 
> On a crop-sensor body like the 7D you'd be better off getting the Canon EF 28mm f1.8 USM for 2 reasons:
> 
> ...



For 50mm in 35mm equivalent, Canon 28mm F/1.8 and 35mm F/2 are the best choice. I heard 28mm is sharper in the center and 35mm is sharper in the edges.


----------



## Studio1930 (Aug 23, 2012)

I had the 50L and returned it. It needs an update. The current version has a serious back (or front, I forget) focus issue where it misses the focus as close distances. I tested mine and found that the focus was off at all distances except where you calibrated it. Google it and you will see that there is a ton of documentation on the focus issue with the 50L. Yes you can still use it and try to limit it to the distance that you know it is sharp but that is not very useful for me.

http://www.ronscheffler.com/blog/?page_id=370


----------



## Menace (Aug 23, 2012)

I'd suggest the 35L for your 7d as 50 will be too long as stated by other posters. It's a superb lens and hold its value well. 

Cheers


----------



## bp (Aug 23, 2012)

Regarding the 50L, if you're seriously considering it, RENT IT FIRST.

The 50L is one of those where some people just fall in love with it (like RLPhoto), and other people get it and then end up hating it (like Studio1930 and myself). For me, it was missing focus very erratically, sometimes front-focusing, sometimes back-focusing, so MA didn't help. It also didn't have the same sharpness at f/1.2 that you get with the 85LII. Even at it's sharpest point, everything has a sort of haze over it. Stop down just a bit, and it's sharp as hell - but if I have to stop down, what's the point of paying the premium...

But again, that was just MY experience. Some people would save their 50L in a house fire before their wife... You never know which camp you'd fall into till you try it (rent the sucker)


----------



## Luke (Aug 23, 2012)

DB said:


> Neither.
> On a crop-sensor body like the 7D you'd be better off getting the Canon EF 28mm f1.8 USM for 2 reasons:



I agree. Crop sensor + 50mm is just too much.. A 28mm or a 35mm would be a much better choice.

That being said, on a fully frame, I have the Sigma 1.4 50mm for my 5DIII, and I quite like it.
Standard 77mm filter size I can share with my 70-200 II and my 24-105.
It needed MFA of 19 before I sent it and my 5d III to Sigma. Got it back and it needed MFA of 7.


----------



## rahkshi007 (Aug 23, 2012)

i have the canon 50mm f1.4 on 5d markii.. from my experience this lens is not very sharp, especially on wide open f1.4. it cannot be compared to other L prime. however, if u slow down to f1.8 or f2, the result are very sharp.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Aug 24, 2012)

rahkshi007 said:


> i have the canon 50mm f1.4 on 5d markii.. from my experience this lens is not very sharp, especially on wide open f1.4. it cannot be compared to other L prime. however, if u slow down to f1.8 or f2, the result are very sharp.



And actually sharper than the 50L above f/2.8. I'm serious.


----------



## RLPhoto (Aug 24, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> rahkshi007 said:
> 
> 
> > i have the canon 50mm f1.4 on 5d markii.. from my experience this lens is not very sharp, especially on wide open f1.4. it cannot be compared to other L prime. however, if u slow down to f1.8 or f2, the result are very sharp.
> ...



+1


----------



## jondave (Aug 24, 2012)

Luke said:


> It needed MFA of 19 before I sent it and my 5d III to Sigma. Got it back and it needed MFA of 7.



Is this a common issue with the Sigma 50mm 1.4? I have one on my 5D3 on +20 and I reckon still needs +2 more to be acceptable.


----------



## AnselA (Aug 24, 2012)

The 50mm F 1.4 is terrific: Beautiful saturation, fast and sharp as the night is long. I get great photos at 1.4 and beyond and don't know what the negative rap is about.


----------



## infared (Aug 24, 2012)

I pained over this decision as well.....I definitely wanted autofocus..and I found the "range" of Canon's offerings to be quite bizarre. I just didn't see why they did not have a screamingly great, with pro-build quality, moderately-upper price range, 50mm lens for their full-frame cameras. How many years have they had to get this right???
Let me also say...I am NOT a Sigma fan in any way, shape or form....but I did a LOT of reading and researching about the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 (with all the extra letters after the name???)...anyway...according to my research this was going to be my selection....purchased from a reliable retailer with a 30-day return policy so that if I got a bad copy with any of the focusing issues (that I am sure that you are aware of), I could return it no questions asked. 
Have to say...this lens is GREAT. The price is right for what it is. It is sharp as a tack slightly off wide open, focuses lightningly fast and has incredible bokeh. This will, without a doubt, be the only Sigma lens I will ever own...I personally think that they nailed this better than Canon. Just my take on it. I have been shooting for over 40years and when I pick up this lens I have a very positive feeling when I go out to shoot with it. It helps me create great images.
Take the leap! LOL! Just my two cents.


----------



## Luke (Aug 24, 2012)

jondave said:


> Is this a common issue with the Sigma 50mm 1.4? I have one on my 5D3 on +20 and I reckon still needs +2 more to be acceptable.



Yup - very common... They told me they did a 'firmware upgrade' to fix it...


----------



## Ewinter (Aug 24, 2012)

> Is this a common issue with the Sigma 50mm 1.4? I have one on my 5D3 on +20 and I reckon still needs +2 more to be acceptable.



it's not unusual for any sigma lens. I've got a 24-60 2.8 that's perfect at 3 metres with +17, +15 at 2.5m and +10 at 2m. Also, all the calibrations are different across the zoom range AND the focal plane changes when you stop down. It's an incredible lens, it's so bad in so many ways that it's a complete statistical anomaly.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 24, 2012)

Some data wouldn't hurt the conversation. 

50mm prime lenses:
Canon 1.4: http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/564-canon50f14ff?start=1
Canon 1.2L: http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/472-canon_50_12_5d?start=1
Sigma 1.4: http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/522-sigma50f14eosff?start=1

Be advised that these tests are all on FF bodies. There is a website section for crop bodies, but the only data they have on these three lenses is with an 8 MP sensor (an old 350D). I've omitted that.

I'm not saying that hard data is the only thing to rate IQ with. User experience is vital, of course. I defer to the forum for that.

But the data says that once you hit F/2, there really isn't a compelling _*sharpness *_argument to use the 1.2L over the 1.4, so I bought the 1.4. No alarms and no surprises. It's up with the 85 F/1.8 as one of the highest [performance divided by cost] lenses you can buy, IMHO.

Advise against the Canon 50 F/1.8 as it is a super duper cheap build, and it's also slow & loud at focusing. 

I firmly agree with those folks calling for the 28mm or 35mm lens instead if your intentions are a single lens for walkaround. On your crop, a 50mm will be a portrait length and not a walkaround length.


----------



## Ewinter (Aug 24, 2012)

ahsanford said:


> I firmly agree with those folks calling for the 28mm or 35mm lens instead if your intentions are a single lens for walkaround. On your crop, a 50mm will be a portrait length and not a walkaround length.


+1.
However, I think my 50 makes a great portrait lens on a crop, so I like it. but it's useless for a walk around


----------



## GEEo (Aug 24, 2012)

Thanks for all the comments and advices guys!! 

I think I'm leaning towards the Sigma now. But I really want the f/1.2 50L too!! just not sure if its the right investment right now since its my first 50mm and first "aftermarket" lens.

The reason I choose the 50mm focal length as my first lens is because I like shooting street photography and I shoot quite a bit at that focal length.


----------



## krickrivera (Aug 24, 2012)

Recently I had purchased a brand new camera, I am getting blur image might be some problem with lens focus . I am not getting what the actual problem anyone here having this kind of problem ever.
HP 83


----------



## bdunbar79 (Aug 24, 2012)

GEEo said:


> Thanks for all the comments and advices guys!!
> 
> I think I'm leaning towards the Sigma now. But I really want the f/1.2 50L too!! just not sure if its the right investment right now since its my first 50mm and first "aftermarket" lens.
> 
> The reason I choose the 50mm focal length as my first lens is because I like shooting street photography and I shoot quite a bit at that focal length.



If you're going Canon, you'll be much, much less disappointed with the 1.4 lens. I NEVER miss with the 1.4, but the 1.2L is just too hit and miss. I don't know why, but it is.


----------



## GEEo (Aug 24, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> GEEo said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks for all the comments and advices guys!!
> ...



Still can't decide which one to choose!! Lol

I wus reading about the Canon 50mm f/1.4 somewhere last night and some people were saying that the Canon has a tighter field of view than the Sigma? Is it because it has a smaller glass or it's not an exact 50mm?


----------



## Ewinter (Aug 24, 2012)

GEEo said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > GEEo said:
> ...


It's rare for anything to hit it's exact focal length, but the canon is closer to 50; the sigma is more like 46 I believe


----------



## GEEo (Aug 28, 2012)

I found another 50mm f/1.4 that I'm very interested with. Has anybody have experience with the Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 lens?

Do you recommend it? How the image quality?

Is the Manual focus only Lens really make a big difference?

Just curious if it's worth the extra cost over the sigma or canon.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Aug 28, 2012)

GEEo said:


> I found another 50mm f/1.4 that I'm very interested with. Has anybody have experience with the Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 lens?
> 
> Do you recommend it? How the image quality?
> 
> ...



I think the Canon 1.4 is going to be the best bet. The Zeiss isn't better enough than the Canon, so why pay more than $350ish or so? I'd say given the performance of the Canon lens, it couldn't be worth the extra cost.


----------



## GEEo (Aug 28, 2012)

The Zeiss looks awesome tho! love the all Metal Look of it.

After seeing some more Street shots on the Canon 50mm f/1.4 I'm impressed of the Lens can do. This lens is gunna be mostly for Street and some portrait use.

I dunno what I'm gunna end up with theses 3 50mm f/1.4 lenses.


----------



## dirtcastle (Aug 28, 2012)

I'm another +1 on the idea that 50mm is not quite wide enough to be versatile. Even on my full frame, I'm leaning toward a 35mm for my walkaround.

I've got the Canon 50mm f/1.4 and I recommend it wholeheartedly. Even when it's soft, it has a great look to it. Yes it has weaknesses under f/2, but even below f/2 it still retains a lot of the character that has made it one of the best selling primes of all time.

For me, the thing that really makes the 50 f/1.4 is the reliable focusing (under reasonable conditions, of course). Focus comes first. The prospect that a lens might have any trouble with focus (relative to the Canon 50 f/1.4) would completely rule it out for me. It's just not worth the hassle of focus issues for minor increases of IQ or build. Just IMO though.

That said, if you were able to find a focus-reliable copy of a Sigma... I agree it would be worth considering (based on the reviews).


----------



## benherman (Aug 29, 2012)

The canon 1.4 is very susceptible to damage. This is due to the old poorly designed front element focusing gearing and drive. I treat my gear well, mine still broke after a few years. Was gonna cost half it's price to fix two parts, not one but two parts. I bought the sigma, it is sharper and much better built. Research it.


----------



## 7enderbender (Aug 29, 2012)

Oh yes, all the (imperfect) 50mm choices. I feel your pain. If you are really interested in 50 on crop maybe you could add the Ed Mika choices into the mix. With his adapters you can use two of the excellent old Canon manual focus lenses for the FD system. Those are pretty special lenses in my experience and his adapter/conversion kits are great. I bought the chipped adapter for my 500mm FD lens and it's great quality. He writes here in the forum as well and is a nice fellow up in Canada.


----------



## EOBeav (Aug 29, 2012)

benherman said:


> The canon 1.4 is very susceptible to damage. This is due to the old poorly designed front element focusing gearing and drive. I treat my gear well, mine still broke after a few years. Was gonna cost half it's price to fix two parts, not one but two parts. I bought the sigma, it is sharper and much better built. Research it.



You speak the truth. The 50 f/1.4 creates some beautiful images, but you have to take extra safeguards with it. Things you wouldn't even think about, like storing it in infinity mode, front element always pointed up, etc... Mine is in the shop right now...and I'm not guaranteed I'm going to get it back in one piece. After this whole ordeal, though, I will still likely replace it with another copy.


----------



## LostArk (Aug 29, 2012)

Whenever I pick up the Canon 50 1.8 or 1.4







I feel like I'm gonna break the damn thing!

I happen to own both. The 50 1.4 focus ring is starting to make grinding noises after less than a year. I slammed my 50 1.8 in a car door once (long story) and it's holding together just fine, but has the worst IQ of the bunch at 1.8. The Sigma has onion ring bokeh and focus / QC issues. The 50 1.2 is heavy and expensive. Your best bet is to flip a coin or consult the I Ching.


----------



## GEEo (Dec 28, 2012)

Hey guys I know I haven't posted for quite a while now.

On my 50mm I decided to wait a couple months more and picked my self up a 50mm f/1.2 L for christmas 

Here's some sample shots I've taken so far. (feel free to critique please be honest)






EOS 7D 1/30, ISO 800, f/1.2






EOS 7D 1/200, ISO 400, f/1.2






EOS 7D 1/2, ISO 100, f/4.5






EOS 7D 1/200, ISO 400, f/1.2


----------



## bdunbar79 (Dec 28, 2012)

I'm definitely a fan of the 50L if you like f/1.2 to f/2. I've never seen better color rendition and sharpness at those wide of apertures. Unfortunately I don't shoot at 50mm that wide, so I couldn't make use of the lens. I like your photos!


----------



## RS2021 (Dec 28, 2012)

Not a big fan of 50L ... but if it works for you, just have fun!


----------



## GEEo (Dec 29, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> I'm definitely a fan of the 50L if you like f/1.2 to f/2. I've never seen better color rendition and sharpness at those wide of apertures. Unfortunately I don't shoot at 50mm that wide, so I couldn't make use of the lens. I like your photos!



I Love this Lens! the 50mm is perfect for what I shoot and the f/1.2 is just awesome!!

But I feel like my 7D is holding back the potential of the lens.

and thanks! I'm glad you like my pics.  I've only been shooting for like a couple of months! lol


----------

