So many reviews! Can someone semi pro tell me if this focal distance is worth the purchase if you already own the canon 50mm f 1.4? I have a 7D and a full frame 5D and I use the 50mm on both. I am looking to gain that "better bokeh" mainly. Thoughts?...
633136
This is a wonderful lens and would be a amazing addition to your bag. Takes great shots and adds fantastic bokeh to your pics.
1249479
I have the Canon 50mm 1.4. The Bokeh is not very good. not a good choice for macro. I'm now looking for a macro lens.
189243
J. ONeill says: Did you make a decision? I am currently debating the same two lenses. I am leaning towards the Canon since it seems there are quite a few quality/AF issues with the Sigma. Any advice is appreciated. If you own a camera with micro focus adjustment like the 50D or 7D, Sigmas front or back focusing is a non-issue. Also, even if you don't own a camera with micro focus adjustment, if you get a Sigma lens that front or back focuses, you can send it to Sigma for calibration.
1789044
The 2.8 works great for indoor pictures and the image quality difference is minimal. I've used both and I dont see any reason to buy the f/4 besides saving money. In April, Canon is updating the 2.8 lens with updated optics and the new IS. Alos the minimum focusing distance is shortened to just under 4 feet. I will be upgrading lenses at that time for sure. After having both lenses, my f/2.8 lens is the one that lives on the camera 95% of the time.
2022546
It's a really great lens for the price and works well with the 7D and other crop sensor canon bodies. You can even put it on a Full Frame body at 16mm and it should vignette too much. The one I have is tack sharp and does do video quite well. At 11mm though it tends to distort the people on the very edges of the frame. Hope this helps.
1695329
I'm sorry, I am using a Canon 7D. I know of 2 friends using it on other bodies and we are all getting great shots at full crop. Sorry I can't be more specific.
501125
I've got the sigma, it's a great lens and a good focal length. (48mm on crop cams) If you are going to be indoors, the f1.4 is handy. I've got the 50mm f1.8 and the extra 2/3's makes a difference when you're already at slow shutter speeds.
8518
I now have the MarkIV and love it. There's nothing to compare to it to anywhere. I was goofing off with it today at ISO 10,000. Yes, the only drawback is not using the 10-22 wide angle and a few efs lenses.Wouldn't mind having the FF 5DMKII also! I was just looking at some ISO comparisons. Almost as good as the MKIV. DPreview has some comparisons. If you want full frame go with the 5D, if you want fast FPS and more length to your lenses go with the MKIV. They are both excellent. The MKIV is a heavier camera.
1827617
These are two wonderful lens. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. Lets start with the f/4 IS. You have great IS capable of shooting sharp images up to to four stops without a tripod. However, you will not be able to stop the action in low light because of the F/4 aperture. IS fixes the shakes from your hands, it has no effect of freezing action in low or dim light. You could raise your ISO, but then you have to worry about noise. The weight of the F/4 will be much more comfortable around your neck than the f/2.8 because it weighs almost half as much. The price of the f/4 is another factor. Its around $500.00 bucks cheaper. The f/2.8 IS is a beast that will produce fantastic images but you are going to pay a price for it. It's heavy and you need to have deep pockets. On the other hand if sports is your thing and creating fantastic images with great bokeh than why not splurg and get what you really want. Are you shooting indoor sports? You should probably consider the f/2.8. Either way you are going to spend some money and you might as well get the one that is going to fit your needs. To sum up if you are shooting indoor sports i would go with the 2.8. If not the f/4 will not dissappoint you.
1774788
I love the bokeh on this - however I very rarely use it - I use my 50-1.2 more and my 200mm - however it is a lovely lens that really I should pull out and use more often!!
387101
This is a matter of personal choice, and finances....the Canon lens is about twice the price of the Sigma. You gain a stop of light. I use this lens for portraits, and get spectacular results. The bokeh is beautiful. However, at 1.4, it is entirely possible to lose focus on the subject's back eye. I did use it for an event, too....and opened it all the way up....beautiful shots.
101689
I don't have enough information yet....what other lenses do you own, and what camera would you be shooting with? Are you the main photographer? Are you bringing lights or at least a high(er) powered flash unit? This is a great lens for macro use, but with a maximum aperture of f/2.8 this cannot be considered a fast lens at all. While a 50mm lens is fantastic for shooting in a more photojournalistic style, you will probably want something a little longer for portraits (especially if you're using a full-frame digital or film camera). Please respond with what camera(s) you'll be using and what other lenses you own and I'll give you more detail
1796672
Hi Jorge, it's beautiful. I normally use the 50mm 1:1.2. I'm spoiled and prefer this over any zoom.
1787338
Any thoughts for general / home photography? I have a Digital Rebel XSI and recently bought the 70-200 mm F2.8 IS version mainly to photograph school events without the annoying flash, and take closeups of my rapidly-growing kids. I have been going back and forth between the two lenses (24-70 F2.8 vs. 24-105 F4.0 IS) but my instinct is that F2.8 is much better than F 4 even with IS. Any guidance appreciated from a professional.
1580106
This lens is useful in many low light situations. it is like the 50mm 1.4G (only bigger, longer, heavier, sharper and a lot more expensive). Compared to the 50mm 1.4G, it also and requires more light due to the longer focal length. Is it suitable for museum or church or any indoor shoot? Yes. Is it worth the price? That depends. IMHO, 50mm can perform that just as well, except it does not that reach.
1974651
I've had the 50mm 1.8 and the kit lens, and I can definitely say this will blow both of them away! This is essentially a high-quality upgrade from the kit lens, and in my opinion gives at least as good an image result as the 50mm prime - but with the range of a zoom. The 35mm I don't have experience with, but I would still bet that the Sigma would compete just fine :)
916482
I personally think that he'd benefit more from purchasing the nifty fifty (50mm f1.8) to cover that range, and then also buy the 100mm f2.8. Honestly there is not a huge difference in terms of image quality between the 50mm f1.8 and the f1.4. The f1.8 does have trouble focusing in dark conditions, but for the price (and for a beginner) it is a great option and it leaves your budget open to get another lens.