Sigma 85mm Portaits (more added)

Wouldn't you agree then that, that is the answer to the problem? And not the fact that we can buy lenses and have them calibrated with the warranty?
Click to expand...
Not sure I completely get the gist of this, but yes if Sigma were to improve their QC and calibrate before release that would be ideal for all. It's just that this isn't the case, so the best option is to return for calibration at Sigma's cost.


EDIT: Sorry if those replies seemed a little narky, not keeping a handle on having a bad day.
 
Last edited:
Digital_Clarity said:
Not sure I completely get the gist of this, but yes if Sigma were to improve their QC and calibrate before release that would be ideal for all. It's just that this isn't the case, so the best option is to return for calibration at Sigma's cost.
Click to expand...

I hate to ask but why is it acceptable to be supplying lenses in the expectation that a large percent will be returned
 
I hate to ask but why is it acceptable to be supplying lenses in the expectation that a large percent will be returned
Click to expand...
I agree in principle that a company who supplies 'faulty' products shouldn't survive (or should change) as people vote with their feet. I suppose the main distinction is that the lens still works, it's just not performing at it's optimum.

Perhaps an analagy is buying a Ferrari that has an advertised top speed of 200 mph, then taking it back to a garage for a tune up after finding it tops out at 160?

Thinking about it that could be a rubbish analgy but I'll post it for discussion anyway :)
 
Digital_Clarity said:
I agree in principle that a company who supplies 'faulty' products shouldn't survive (or should change) as people vote with their feet. I suppose the main distinction is that the lens still works, it's just not performing at it's optimum.

Perhaps an analagy is buying a Ferrari that has an advertised top speed of 200 mph, then taking it back to a garage for a tune up after finding it tops out at 160?

Thinking about it that could be a rubbish analgy but I'll post it for discussion anyway :)
Click to expand...

It's a rubbish analogy :)


I know ever company supplies the odd duffer but sigma supply an awful lot.

It shouldnt be that difficult for them to sort that's the odd thing
 
It's a rubbish analogy :)

I know ever company supplies the odd duffer but sigma supply an awful lot.

It shouldnt be that difficult for them to sort that's the odd thing
Click to expand...
It makes you wonder whether the intense discussion around different forums on the web ever filters back through the ranks at Sigma.
Is it mentioned in their meetings on product/company standards? Do they have targets or even plans to resolve their poor QC?

We need a Sigma employee to stick their head above the parapet here!
 
Digital_Clarity said:
It makes you wonder whether the intense discussion around different forums on the web ever filters back through the ranks at Sigma.
Is it mentioned in their meetings on product/company standards? Do they have targets or even plans to resolve their poor QC?

We need a Sigma employee to stick their head above the parapet here!
Click to expand...

maybe this is the cost of having a lens that performs as good but costs a lot less?

if we take the 85mm 1.2 canon and this 85mm sigma. the reviews would suggest that they are at least on par in the iq and other factors. yet the sigma is half the price, so something has to give, perhaps the calibration is what is giving and allowing them to position the lens cheaper?

tjat system doesnt work with all sigma lenses though as some are not cheaper than the competition
 
I do wonder though if some of these reported sigma QC issues are accurate though.

We all know of someone who buys the best gear, but isnt nessecarily the best photographer in the world. They think having an expensive pro quality lens will make them better. The get thier new Sigma 85mm, cos they cant afford the Nikon version and go out start taking photos. They come back, upload to the computer and see that 60% are OOF, or not very sharp. They imediately blame Sigma's QC, because they read somewhere that some sigma lenses have issues. As such, they post up on a forum saying thier new Sigma 85mm is rubbish...

Times this by several thousand people and you undoubtably have a lot of misleading reports.
Im not saying that Sigma are perfect, I just dont thik they are as bad as some make them out to be. I dont think they can be, otherwise they wouldnt still be trading.
 
TCR4x4 said:
I do wonder though if some of these reported sigma QC issues are accurate though.

We all know of someone who buys the best gear, but isnt nessecarily the best photographer in the world. They think having an expensive pro quality lens will make them better. The get thier new Sigma 85mm, cos they cant afford the Nikon version and go out start taking photos. They come back, upload to the computer and see that 60% are OOF, or not very sharp. They imediately blame Sigma's QC, because they read somewhere that some sigma lenses have issues. As such, they post up on a forum saying thier new Sigma 85mm is rubbish...

Times this by several thousand people and you undoubtably have a lot of misleading reports.
Im not saying that Sigma are perfect, I just dont thik they are as bad as some make them out to be. I dont think they can be, otherwise they wouldnt still be trading.
Click to expand...

That assessment reminds me of exactly what happened when the 7D came out. Yes there were a few issues, but the complaints were disproportionate.
 
TCR4x4 said:
I do wonder though if some of these reported sigma QC issues are accurate though.

We all know of someone who buys the best gear, but isnt nessecarily the best photographer in the world. They think having an expensive pro quality lens will make them better. The get thier new Sigma 85mm, cos they cant afford the Nikon version and go out start taking photos. They come back, upload to the computer and see that 60% are OOF, or not very sharp. They imediately blame Sigma's QC, because they read somewhere that some sigma lenses have issues. As such, they post up on a forum saying thier new Sigma 85mm is rubbish...

Times this by several thousand people and you undoubtably have a lot of misleading reports.
Im not saying that Sigma are perfect, I just dont thik they are as bad as some make them out to be. I dont think they can be, otherwise they wouldnt still be trading.
Click to expand...


I think its more a case that sigma are now known for QC issues so people look harder for them, then they do on the big brands
 
Last edited:
Here is a quote from the digital picture:

I have been getting a lot of requests for a Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM Lens review, and, while I hope to bring you a full review of this lens at some point, the ISO chart results tell us a lot about the image quality of a lens. And in this case, the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM Lens performs quite well.

However, I need to add a warning that these results do not tell the complete story of the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM Lens. To bring you at least the standardized results from the Sigma 85, I have to date purchased three and returned two of these lenses.

The first lens was consistently front focusing. The second lens was focusing so inconsistently that I wished for the first one back. The third lens is focusing very inconsistently, but does seem to average to the correct focus distance.

Roger at LensRentals.com is having the same problem - he has even posted a warning on his Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM Lens rental page.
Click to expand...

With Sigma there is no smoke without fire to me. Either the same couple of folk are getting all the bad copies and telling thousands of people, or the QC is a little lax. I have heard when you micro adjust it is fine and it's a lens that interests me, but the Nikon 85mm F/1.4 D would probably be a better option.
 
fantastic images! i have a d700 with 50mm f/1.4 and that is also fantastic!!
 
POAH said:
pretty big statement with no evidence to support it.
Click to expand...

Theres a fair amount of evidence sigma didn't build that rep overnight .Have a look at the guys from lens rentals in the US and their stats on sigma lenses. From about three posts up apparently they've even posted warnings about this lens on their rental page

I guess there's enough evidence there

Then have a look at the number of people who've had repeated issues with their lenses over here

I have to wonder do you post this sort of thing just for the hell of it or is there actually a reason :shrug:
 
Last edited:
Last year I decided to give the primes a chance. I bought the Canon 85 1.8 as I was impressed with a friends. I loved it, absolutely fantastic. I then decided to buy the Siggy 50 1.4 which I must say is something else. Absolutely gorgeous, quick, very sharp and lovely bo to boot. I sold the canon 85 1.8 to buy the siggy 85 1.4. I bought it from a One Stop Digital (Hong Kong based) which basically means it isn't covered by a UK warranty and I'd need to send this back to HK if I need anything done with it!!! Global company!!!!

Anyways, I'm not as blown away with the Sigma 85 as I was with the canon 85. I think if you shoot wide open then it's an art in itself to hit the spot everytime! When shooting at 1.4 at the closet possible distance your looking at around 7mm of DoF, a little movement from either you or the subject are your lost it. If not it's very nice.

I need to get out there a little more with it, get shooting and see how I get on with it...currently though, I wish I'd have kept the canon!!
 
justhitched said:
Anyways, I'm not as blown away with the Sigma 85 as I was with the canon 85. I think if you shoot wide open then it's an art in itself to hit the spot everytime! When shooting at 1.4 at the closet possible distance your looking at around 7mm of DoF, a little movement from either you or the subject are your lost it. If not it's very nice.

I need to get out there a little more with it, get shooting and see how I get on with it...currently though, I wish I'd have kept the canon!!
Click to expand...

i have to say, i've been shooting with fast primes for a good couple of years now and i'm comfortable about doing so, it does take practise and there is nothing you can do to stop your subject from moving. Try focussing with AI Servo and keeping the eye or whatever over a focus point, at close distances near to the mfd, it's the only way.

when i compare what people are doing the canon 1.8 and the sigma 1.4 on flickr, i see more, don't know, 'magic'.

don't give up on it, it's a great lens. i love mine.
 
thanks Mark, I had a quick play this afternoon. Only took a couple of shots but here's an example at 1.6.

I'll try the AI Servo and see how I get on with it.
IMG_4872.jpg

IMG_4872a.jpg
 
Last edited:
Got these last weekend, both at 1.6 using servo, with a bit of practice using servo you can get a swing shot nice and sharp even with a moving target. Depth of field in shot 2 is 12cm which is more than enough.

5455980322_6a9d429f01_b.jpg



5455980326_7e3dd7e424_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
reminds me why I'm keeping my 50mm f1.4G on a crop sensor! Pretty much the same results imo. Great pics :).
 
i would imagine it would be just as good performance wise, but the length will be the big difference

i always found my 85 was too long on my crop, i only ever used it outside
 
On a crop sensor it would turn into a 135 F1.4 with less vignetting and better corner sharpness ! Basically the crop sensor throws away the "difficult" bit of the image circle !
 
Joe - if I remember rightly you use the 5d Mark II, so I wondered if you'd answer a question.

Do you find that you get consistently accurate focus with the outer points when you're using narrow dof?
 
markrichardson said:
Joe - if I remember rightly you use the 5d Mark II, so I wondered if you'd answer a question.

Do you find that you get consistently accurate focus with the outer points when you're using narrow dof?
Click to expand...

yeah i do actually and I'd read that wasn't the case, that the outer focus points on a 5d mark 2 weren't well known for their accuracy, but i'm not struggling - many of the shots i've posted in this thread are using outer focus points, including the last two - the swing for example was the right most point (or top when in portrait mode)
 
That's interesting - I'll have to experiment a bit more with mine then. I was put off using them much by the bad press.

Do you find they focus fine in lower light situations too?
 
i've found that some of the outer focus pointers are more accurate than others so do experiment.
 
Just got this lens, it's incredible! I've found the AF to be fast and accurate, and it's really sharp at f1.4. The bokeh is just lovely.
 
Last edited:
I got mine on Tuesday and love it :)

Will have to wait till the weekend to try it out properly but took a few test shots with it

IMG_2914.jpg


IMG_2915.jpg


IMG_2966.jpg
 
That is next on my list :) and from what I get out of my 50mm 1.4 I am sure the 85mm will be as amazing
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top