50mm canon vs Sigma - Guess the pic

J

joescrivens

Suspended / Banned
Messages
15,052
Name
Joe
Edit My Images
Yes
So I took delivery of my Sigma 50mm 1.4 that everyone seems to say great things about and I wanted to compare it against my Canon 1.8 to make sure it was worth the £280 extra pounds.

The test-

Tripod
Remote release
Mirror lockup
Av mode
ISO 100
centre focus point on plutos nose
aperture setting of 2.8

The only thing I changed was the lens. Which photos came from which lens do you think?

1
4926391560_4d0cfe96c2_b.jpg


100% crop
4926392036_9c5909797b_b.jpg


2
4926391786_2d9eaebfc5_b.jpg


100% crop
4925796853_afb96d7f92_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
Jeez...

I wouldn't have thought there would be that much difference between these two lenses but those two images are worlds apart. I'm no expert on lens testing but if we assume this to be a perfect test then the second image is better in every respect, I am amazed!
 
Now the scrooge in me is *hoping* that the bottom one is the Canon.
(This is because I am in fact far too tight to spend the extra £280)
 
I'll reveal shortly, I have some more test shots to post also, I just realised this should be in equipment - mods could you move?
 
I have a Canon 1.8 (who doesnt) and know it to be very good, if the bottom one is the Siggy (and I hope it is) then its well worth the extra money, if it isnt the bottom one then I think it would be going back under warranty along with these two pics and I'd be asking why?

Matt
 
Ok head on block, bottom one is the Canon, it has a great bit of glass in it no doubt especially stopped down, it's just a shame about the pasticy casing and noisy motor around it. It can however give perfect sharp images. I know for a fact the Sigma can produce outstanding results but as always Sigma's quality control leaves alot to be disired!!! I fear the Sigma here is a bit of a dud.

I could be completely wrong of course and probably am lol.
 
Last edited:
having heard a lot of good/bad things about any sigma, it wouldn't be a surprise if the siggy is worse. I do hope it's not, especially when dpreview said that the siggy is a class leader.
 
I would say #2 is the canon,i hope,put us out of our misery.:)
 
The top one appears to have actually focussed on the nose, whereas the bottom one is focussed on the eyes. That said, I think the optical quality of the bottom one is better.

I think the bottom is the nifty fifty... for various reasons.
 
neil_g said:
im not sure how valid this comparison is.. the sigma is highly regarded to be best in class (across f1.4 options) in sharpness wide open.

or is that just me?
Click to expand...

ok, what would be a better comparison for a test against these two lenses? I cant stop the 1.8 down to 1.4 so I can't do a 1.4 comparison - would you prefer to see two 1.8 shots?

I have those too.
 
That sounds a good comparison
 
joescrivens said:
ok, what would be a better comparison for a test against these two lenses? I cant stop the 1.8 down to 1.4 so I can't do a 1.4 comparison - would you prefer to see two 1.8 shots?

I have those too.
Click to expand...

Surely a fairer comparison would be the same number of stops on each lens from wide open. So say F4 and 4.5 for instance, if possible.

Anyway apart from that which one is which? :)

Matt
 
neil_g said:
thats my point. if youre going to compare lenses compare it to the canon 1.4.

in my opinion.
Click to expand...

well, I want the best 50mm that I can get for my money when I'm shooting portraits. I don't really shoot at 1.4 - too narrow dof. I haven't bought this for the 1.4 shooting, but for the general shooting through all the apertures.

Do you not think the sigma 50 1.4 is a better lens optically than the 1,8 at say 2.8 then? but only it is the best lens for 1.4?
 
trencheel303 said:
The top one appears to have actually focussed on the nose, whereas the bottom one is focussed on the eyes. That said, I think the optical quality of the bottom one is better.

I think the bottom is the nifty fifty... for various reasons.
Click to expand...

care to elaborate on your reasoning?
 
MatBin said:
Surely a fairer comparison would be the same number of stops on each lens from wide open. So say F4 and 4.5 for instance, if possible.

Anyway apart from that which one is which? :)

Matt
Click to expand...

f4 for the 1.4 and f/4.5 for the 1.8?

Sure I can do that - Do others think thats a good comparison?
 
Tell us the answer!

I think the point alot of people are trying to make is that the sigma may not be as sharp at f2.8 but it is sharper at f1.4 becasue the canon won't do it and that is infact what you are spending the extra cash for. Personally if it does turn out the canon is the last image I would be disapointed with the sigma regardless of the fact it goes a little bit wider and would be returning it.
 
trencheel303 said:
The top one appears to have actually focussed on the nose, whereas the bottom one is focussed on the eyes. That said, I think the optical quality of the bottom one is better.

I think the bottom is the nifty fifty... for various reasons.
Click to expand...

Agree on the focus being different but would say the top one isn't focussed on anything we can see!
 
Nope they were right, I was looking at the max aperture instead of the actual aperture,

so now someone's gone and revealed the results for me I guess I'll tell. Top one was disappointingly the sigma

I have some more results coming next
 
joescrivens said:
Nope they were right, I was looking at the max aperture instead of the actual aperture,

so now someone's gone and revealed the results for me I guess I'll tell. Top one was disappointingly the sigma

I have some more results coming next
Click to expand...

I doubt an extra half stop down for the Siggy would improve it much, so a very dissapointing result for your money, have you micro adjusted the Canon lens against the body, or maybe they go together well out of the box and you need to micro adjusted the Sigma.
Having said that the Sigma doesnt look as sharp anywhere so adjusting may not help but I think I'd be trying that before I sent it back and I wouldnt rely on a single image as a yardstick, I'd be testing different apertures and distances, maybe you just hit a rough spot with the Sigma.

Matt
 
These were at f/2 is0 100, handheld, AV

Sigma,

4926403984_d5e72e5b8d_b.jpg


4926404184_f5f3f34758_b.jpg


Canon

4926404412_e3135ae083_b.jpg


4926404618_fcec24cb1a_z.jpg


I think the most obvious thing I have seen is that the sigma is really back focussing (or is that front?)

basically look at this shot, the focus point was on the centre of the wheel, yet thats clearly not where the focus is

4925809631_dba4eab8d7_b.jpg
 
Whoop got it then, I would definitley say its a dud lens without a shadow of doubt, Sigma's quality control strikes again.
 
Last edited:
joescrivens said:
care to elaborate on your reasoning?
Click to expand...

The reason I thought the top one was the Sigma is three main reasons:

-> The out of focus background is smoother
-> The lens has actually focussed where you told it to, on the nose.
-> There is less colour fringing, apart from a slight green fringe behind the object, which seems to be common with this Sigma

The bottom image is focussed on the eyes, not the nose. Unsurprising, since the nifty fifty's focussing is dreadful in the best of times. it does appear to be sharper, but I would expect this from a nifty - sharpness stopped down a bit is phenominal. But, it doesn't do f/1.4 and I would bet it's less sharp than the Sigma at f/1.8 - f/2.2 ish. There also appears to be purple fringing in front of the subject and some green fringing behind, again common with the nifty.

The image from the nifty looks 'clearer' overall but this is probably just because it has focussed on a much larger area of the 100% crop, giving a perception of more (and hence better) sharpness. The Sigma is actually correct because it has focussed on the nose.

From the second set of images however, it does look like the Sigma might be 'out' by a few millimetres or so.
 
Last edited:
trencheel303 said:
The reason I thought the top one was the Sigma is three main reasons:

-> The out of focus background is smoother
-> The lens has actually focussed where you told it to, on the nose.
-> There is less colour fringing, apart from a slight green fringe behind the object, which seems to be common with this Sigma
Click to expand...

Interesting you think the sigma has hit the focus correctly when I just had to microadjust it by 20 as if you look on the spinning wheel the focus is WAY off.

trencheel303 said:
But, it doesn't do f/1.4 and I would bet it's less sharp than the Sigma at f/1.8 - f/2.2 ish.
Click to expand...



I've tested them at 1.8 and 2.0 and 2.2 and the canon is till sharper
 
joescrivens said:
Do you not think the sigma 50 1.4 is a better lens optically than the 1,8 at say 2.8 then? but only it is the best lens for 1.4?
Click to expand...

not what i said.

its a bit like comparing a corsa with 100bhp to a fiesta with 120bhp. both will do pretty much the same thing but ones got a bit more poke.

joescrivens said:
I've tested them at 1.8 and 2.0 and 2.2 and the canon is till sharper
Click to expand...

whats the sig like at 1.4?

edit - if it is out a bit then i would recommend sending it to sigma under warranty for recalibration if you can wait.. it is (or at least should be in this case) a phenominal lens.
 
Last edited:
ok this time I did a manual focus just to see if that could get better results, and I think it has, although I wouldn't say the siggy was sharper than the canon here, I think the colour is better

Sigma
4925849709_ab59ddc966_b.jpg


4926445710_6f6548f502_b.jpg


Canon
4925850255_0185c75c58_b.jpg


4926446218_c3d5817478_b.jpg


thoughts on those results?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top