Sigma 50 & 85 Art on Canon 6D Compared to 'Canon L Primes'

[h_._jm]

Dear Pros and Enthusiasts

 

Some insight into this would help me very much and be much appreciated.

I have the following gear: Canon 6D (waiting for this years announcement of next Mirrorless Canon's to upgrade hopefully); 24-70 F2.8 II; 17-40L; Sigma 50 art; Sigma 85 art; Tamron 70-200 F2.8.

 

I then spoke to a friend at work who highly recommended the 35L II and given back in the days the Mark 1 was my favourite and most regretful sale; I bought the II. It blew me away; mainly because of Canon AF speed and accuracy but also straight cinematic colours coming out of the lens. My main subject is kids and family. My daughter is 2; my nephews are 4 and 2 months. So the 35L II with Canon's AF just was so perfect.

 

This made me re-assess my Sigma gear. I realized the 85 art had terrible back-focusing; lucky I have the dock and after spending many many hours I think I fixed it almost completely.

 

I done a sample photoshoot and tally how many photos are in focus and out of focus with those cute crazy children. I can't blame it all on the lenses; my 6D AF is not the best and children walking; jumping running is not easy.

Anyway:

Sigma 85 art after calibration-> 20 pics in focus; 17 out of focus. Despite many where outdoors and shutter speeds of around 1/250 or faster. If I shoot static/adults I get >90% keeper rate.

Canon 35 II-> roughly 60 in focus and 20 out of focus. But admittedly many pics where slow shutter speeds for kids i.e. 1/100 or 1/125.

 

Anyway; I have 2 months sigma warranty left and I'm feeling a little underwhelmed by Sigma Art given now I have kids and I feel AF is something that Sigma/Tamron cannot deliver upon when it comes to sport/children fast moving photography. My wife wants me to sell both sigma's and the USB dock :)

 

I also feel that if I sell both and get any Canon 85 or 100 or 135 I would actually have far higher keeper rate.

 

I'm realizing DXO stupidly doesn't assess factors like AF speed and accuracy isn't it? Like Optics alone isn't everything.

Any opinions highly welcome

I can get 85 1.8 nice, affordable new and small; USM new for ~ 300 USD

100 F2 also interested but relatively expensive...like about 400-450 USD

135L biggest bargain when used I had it and sold it for being too zoomed in; but now that I have kids and AF is very important happy to bring it back and can get it used on ebay for ~ 450-500 USD

 

I guess if I sell I will lose ebay merchant fees; time; etc... and wanted to share my thoughts and dilemma and get some guidance first.

 

Regards to you all

Peter

[h_._jm]

Sorry with this number comparison; let me summarize it or phrase my experience in a sentence or two. Basically when shooting kids, The 35L II even when used in an indoor cafe setting with slower shutter speed has noticeably better keeper rate than Sigma 85 art when shooting kids in daylight in a park. Sigma 50 art is slightly better than my 85.

[andylynn]

Hey Peter. I’m not one of those guys that go nuts over Sigma, but...

 

Kids move a lot, adults stay still when getting their picture taken. Combine with the good but not great AF servo tracking mode on a 6D and you’re going to get a low hit rate. Because of DOF effects a 35 is going to get you more in-focus shots than an 85 anyway. I suspect that your lower keeper rate isn’t because of Sigma but because you are trying to track focus on kids with a fast tele using a camera that’s not great at focus tracking.

 

Since you’re thinking about changing systems anyway, I think that buying new SLR lenses might not be the way to go. Take it from somebody who learned the hard way: SLR lenses on mirrorless with adapters don’t provide the user experience you would hope for. They never work as well as they do on their native cameras, or as well as the native mirrorless lenses work on the mirrorless cameras, and the combination of mirrorless camera plus adapter is not much smaller than a DSLR. If you get a mirrorless and love it you will end up with a set of native lenses in little time. So it doesn’t pay off to be in both camps.

 

That’s a long way of saying that my recommendation is to either commit to DSLRs and upgrade to a 5D iii or iv, then assess the lenses (and maybe do swap out the Sigmas for f/1.8 Canons to save weight and get some money back, or just rely on your zooms, since you can’t possibly be getting shots of moving kids in focus at f/1.4 anyway) or jump ship to mirrorless, ditch all the DSLR stuff and save your back. If you don’t like the Canons, look elsewhere. Sony, Fuji and Olympus have years of head start on Canon, they already have full lens selections and bodies at all levels.

[paddler4]

Shutter speed is largelyindependent of focus. Are you perhaps mixing focusing problems with motion blur?

 

It's not clear that you have a comparison that has isolated the differences between the lenses. Are you composing with the 35 the same as with the 85, that is, so the subject fills the same portion of the frame? If not--if you don't zoom with your feet enough to frame the same--you have a difference in DOF favoring the 35. Are shooting both lenses with the same aperture, under similar lighting?

 

Not sure why the warranty is an issue since you aren't claiming that the Sigma is defective.

 

I've never shot with the 85 Art, but it gets great reviews. For example, here is an extract from the review on Imaging resource:

 

The Sigma 85mm lens autofocuses very quickly, racking from closest focus to infinity in about 1 second, thanks to its electronic Hyper Sonic Motor. In basic usage, autofocus was fast, locked onto targets easily and didn't hunt while focusing. Small changes in focus happen very quickly, and the AF motor is almost silent.

 

I think I would do some more controlled tests before deciding that the problem you are encountering is with the choice of equipment. given the reviews, if the 85mm really does poorly in a systematic, controlled test (same lighting, same shutter speed, etc.), then I would be tempted to send it back to Sigma while it is under warranty to have them look it over.

 

BTW, I do a lot of candid shots of kids. I don't know what my keeper rate is, but it is nowhere close to 100% because they are constantly moving, I shoot them primarily with the generation 1 24-105 L, which is markedly inferior to your 24-70 II, but I would still say that most of the problems are mostly my technique and the constant motion of the kids. I find that indoors, I usually can't mange with ambient light and use TTL flash, bounced to the ceiling with a bounce card for some direct lighting.

[Robin Smith]

Agree with what is said above. Easier to get a 35mm lens shot in focus than an 85mm, particularly at wider apertures. However, my experience with Sigma is that their AF system is more temperamental than native Canon EF lenses. I suspect there is little to no problem on the mirrorless cameras, but for DSLRs for whatever reason some people find them less than reliable. I had this experience with a pre-ART 85mm lens. Great optically, but AF was suspect despite AF adjusting. If you have the Sigma dock then you should adjust AF with that too. For people, the EF 35Ls (I or II) are excellent as is the much cheaper 35 f2 IS, and I bet the new 85 f1.4 L is good. The 85mm f1.8 is a well-known favorite too. Personally, I think the best lens for fast moving kids is the 24-70 f2.8 II.

[John Crowe]

I agree with all posts above. Your keeper rate is based upon focal length rather than the lens. The Canon EF 1.2 lenses have had similar problems.

[h_._jm]

Thanks Guys for every single comment here;

I had my daughters birthday yesterday indoors and I intentionally tried different lenses and shot with 35 II; 24-70 II; sigma 50 and 85 art.

I made the following observations:

- Glad the Sigma 85 is very sharp now

- The keeper rate between my 24-70, 35 and 85 are very similar now perhaps lower with the primes a little

- This is the first time I used all in same setting; thus similar apertures and shutter speeds for the primes.

- Very impressed with the Sigma 85 (but after at least 5-6 hours learning and doing the USB dock calibration thing many times over and over till I got it right).

 

Settings indoors; shooting ISO 1600 ideally but max 3200; shutter speeds I tried to be 1/160 or faster and aperture of about 1.8.

I do feel the bigger factors are thus Camera AF speed/accuracy and subject motion blur (KIDS who couldn't care less about me photographing them!)

 

Definitely time to sell my Sigma 50 it's a little redundant now and 35 is such a useful focal length indoors. I'm glad my 85 worked out.

Once again thanks to you all

[Nick D.]

Good, you got it fixed. I use to shoot with 6D and it never was autofocus champion, especially with moving subjects.

Try Mark3 or 4, you have good set of lens.

[hjoseph7]

Look here: Sigma 85mm f/1.4 Art vs. Canon 85mm f/1.2L II: how does it stack up? - DIY Photography

[Robin Smith]

The 85mm f1.2 is known to be a slow AFer. Not unlike the EF 50/1.2L. The 85/1.4 and 85/1.8 are much faster. The 6D, in my experience, has perfectly fine AF for kids, but you really need to use the central spot only for best results. The 5DII and IV are good with all the cross type spots. For most subjects, using only the central spot, I don't notice much of a difference 6D vs 5DIV to be honest.

[h_._jm]

Thanks to everyone; thanks for the link comparing the Sigma to the 85 1.2 II; Robin I surely do hope that for sports there is a noticeable difference if I upgrade my 6D.

 

I made a more challenging task than Shooting Kids today, I shot tennis with friends.

Keeper rate:

Sigma 85 art, 18/28 = 64%

Tamron 70-200 F2.8 23/36= 64%

* I feel honestly the low keeper rate is due to the 6D's basic AF; just a bit worried but asking anyone who knows do you think upon upgrading one day to 5D IV or another camera with more capable AF this keeper rate will surely improve? or not necessarily? Just inside me this fear given it's unknown if it's the basic AF or the 3rd party lenses doing this. Surely I should try one of my Canon lenses during tennis to compare and find out.

 

It was casual to Fast paced tennis with friends. Used Central point only on my 6D. Sigma shot at F1.6-F1.8; Tamron

shot at F2.8 and shutter speed been 1/400 or faster. Actually given the narrow field of view on my Sigma I think thats

relatively impressive.

[h_._jm]

hjoseph7 thanks for the link; yes I am familiar with the 85 1.2 II having slow AF for a Canon L lens

[digitmstr]

I have the 135L and it's a great lens, in every way. You can't go wrong with it and I got mine from Canon refurb for a bargain price (albeit years ago). I also have the 85 f/1.8 and it works well, even wide open.

[JDMvW]

For some actual numerical and concrete data on sharpness, etc., you can look at various posts on Lens Rentals.com. Just now they are doing a series on MTF charts summaries from their tests. While their testing may not have full statistical validity, they are one place that tests multiples of the same lens and address variability.

Their post on Sigma Primes summary at:

Just MTF Charts: Sigma Prime Lenses

 

There are earlier summaries on other marques and full tests also if you look over their reports.

[William Michael]

Dear Pros and Enthusiasts, Some insight into this would help me very much and be much appreciated.

 

Certainly with any automation there are limits and knowing those limits is useful, in fact mandatory if you're going to get the best out of your tools. Certainly identifying and buying top notch gear is a primary consideration. Certainly aspiring to high technical standards is an excellent pursuit.

 

That stated and speaking candidly with the experience of 1500 weddings, numerous portraits and a range of professional sporting shoots under my belt over the past 40+ years: overwhelmingly the majority shots that end up on the cutting room floor are a result of user error and not the gear being out of specification.

 

Citing only the stats of your 'shooting tennis with friends', I'd be looking at technique rather than gear - if your keeper rate is only 64%.

 

***

 

My experience with the EF 135 F/2L and the EF 85 F/1.8 concurs with Post #13: both are excellent for shooting action.

 

As already mentioned, though phrased differently (Post #4), Subject Movement that is closer to the Film/Senor Plane (i.e. at a shorter Subject Distance) requires technique and technical changes than if the action is at a greater Subject Distance. The direction of the movement to the Camera's Axis is also relevant.

 

As also noted, none of these tests are controlled: there are too many variables.

 

WW