I need a 50mm

<p>If you don't need autofocus, why don't you take a look after the <strong>Zeiss ZE Planar 1,4/50mm</strong> , and compare it with the others!</p>

<p>Paulo, I have 24-105 and had 50 1.4<br>

My reason to have one 1.4 lens is to use it at 1.4 to isolate subject from background and to to use faster exposures when subject is in movement and low light. I am a hobbist, I do not worry about distorsions but high iso and 1.4 allows me to photograph in more situations. I would like 50 and 85 1.2 but I can not justify the amount of money because I am not going to earn money with them.</p>

<p>50 1.4 is my favorite lens, regardless of FF/1.6, etc. . . I have not owned the 1.2, but imagine I would/may like that better. The 1.8 though is hard to beat for the price. On a tight budget I would add the 1.8 or possibly better the older 1.8 with metal mount. Nice is that you don't even need to add a filter for protection. At this price, you can just replace the lens every couple of years if you do get scratches, etc. . . The 1.4 focuses very quickly and the low light image quality is very good in my experience.</p>

<p>The only downside of the f1.8 is that it flares very much when pointed into light sources. This and its color rendition, which is not that good as for example the L lenses or the more expensive primes. But its resolution characteristics are very very good!<br>

I personally prefer to use the 35mm f2 which is a real gem of a lens. Nice, sharp and contrasty even wide open. Here the only downside is its bokeh - nervous. Stopped down you get pentagon-shaped out of focus highlights which are not that pretty after all. But, the 35mm f2 is a comparatively small and, despite its flaws, a very competent lens!</p><div></div>

<p>Anyone with photos taken with Sigma 50mm 1.4 in a full frame body?</p>

<p>dpreview has some taken with the 5D in this group (the others are taken with the 450D):</p>

<p><a href="http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/sigma_50_1p4_samples/">http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/sigma_50_1p4_samples/</a></p>

<p>Thanks</p>

<p>http://www.bjp-online.com/public/showPage.html?page=837772<br>

http://www.modeemi.fi/~leopold/Photo/Sigma50mmF14/<br>

What do you think about?</p>

<p>They are far reviews. Also if you look at DPreview, in addition to the Sigma you will find a review of the Canon 50 1.4 and 50 1.8. Additionally DPreview posts a sharpness chart for each lens. You select the aperture and it shows you how the lens performed in the test. According to DPreview, the Sigma is best at wide open. But at F4 or smaller the Canon 50 1.4 has a edge on sharpness. However its Bokeh and flare resistance is not as good as the sigma. In the second review you posted I found this interesting:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>All in all, I still think that the flare resistance of Canon's 50/1.4 is quite poor, particularly considering how little glass there is inside the lens. The 24-105/4L's puts in a surprisingly solid performance for a zoom. The winner is, however, the Sigma.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>The pictures he posted during this portion of his testing, in my opinion, show the 24-105 slightly outperforming the Canon 50 1.4. The Canon 50 1.4 being a prime should have easily won. His summary of the test was:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>

<table border="0" cellpadding="0">

<tbody>

<tr>

<th>+ </th>

<td>Smoother bokeh</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<th>+ </th>

<td>No moving front element</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<th>+ </th>

<td>Better flare resistance</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<th>+ </th>

<td>Better center sharpness and contrast when using large apertures</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<th>+ </th>

<td>Less light fall-off (vignetting), particularly at f/2</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<th>+ </th>

<td>Better build quality</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<th>- </th>

<td>Worse corner sharpness</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<th>- </th>

<td>Slightly more expensive</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<th>- </th>

<td>Slightly slower auto focus</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<th>- </th>

<td>Heavier</td>

</tr>

</tbody>

</table>

</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>The last 3 items are not about the optics. So if you drop them the Sigma wins in all but one category. Since you want to use the lens in low light situations, the reviews linked above indicate the Sigma is the better choice. </p>

<p>I think they're all good. Personally, I use the 50mm f/1.4 most of the time, but I have the 1.8 as well. Depnds on your budget.</p>

<p>I post regularly on 50mm lenses: http://blog.michaelwillems.ca/?s=50mm</p>

<p>One note of caution: on Canon cameras like my 1D MkIII and 1Ds MkIII, I do get inconsistent focus wide open, and you are likely to find the same. Yes, even when you do it well and carefully and you know what you are doing. Try taking 10 shots of something at f/1.8 or f/1.4 and see how well focused they are: you'll get a few totally out of focus. Not a reason not to use them.. just a reason to take more pictures when you need to be sure.</p>

<p>Michael</p>

 

<p>Michael,</p>

<p>I used to get inconsistent focus too, I did the micro AF adjustment as linked to here ( http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/cameras/1ds3_af_micoadjustment.html ), it is super accurate (and free) and I have been getting much more consistent focus since.</p>

<p>Hope this helps, Scott.</p>

<p>I had Canon's 1.4 and 1.8 and Sigma's 1.4. If I had to buy one again it would be the Sigma. Not the best AF accuracy but best IQ and best BQ.</p>

<p>http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/717198</p>

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim.</p>

<p>I love that nervous bokeh of 35/2. I also like the nervous bokeh of 50/1.8. Creamy bokeh of 50/1.4 or 85/1.8 makes me sick sometimes..... if not used in accordance with photo's subject (like beautiful woman or generally beauty subject).</p>

<p>Scott,</p>

<p>Will try. But what gets me most is the inconsistency. I'll try though, so let me see.</p>

<p>Also - I just added a 7D to my repertoire to try that. I'll oput the 35mm f/1.4 on it so that effectively gives me a nifty fifty again. And it has the new focus system and all.</p>

<p>Michael</p>

 

<p>the sigma is awesome</p>

<p>If you have no chances to send lens for calibration, which is more reliable and suitable on a 5D body? Canon 1.4 or Sigma 1.4?<br>

Even Sigma with a front or back focusing problem making you to use manual focus is better than a Canon 1.4?</p>

<p>Canon 50 1.4 done :)</p>

<p>Canon 50 1.4 done :)</p>