|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on October 14, 2019 Pros: Sharpness, bokeh Cons: Nobody Opinion: I use this lens on a pentax k20d and I have no focus problem (maybe I'm lucky). The lens is just fantastic, the other fixtures I've tried don't even come close to the quality of the photos it produces. I almost always use it at full openness in dimly lit environments, shooting almost always in natural light, achieving amazing results. The lens is sharp to go crazy, and has fantastic colors. Most of the photos taken do not retouch them, they are already perfect so. I took it by preferring it to the Pentax SMC FA 50 mm f/1.4 given the reviews on the internet and I have no regrets about the choice. Only neo the weight and clutter compared with similar products, as it comes closer to a 24-70 zoom than a fixed, but for me it is not a problem, indeed it balances the machine body very well. The construction is very solid and is equipped with bag and lampshade. |
 | sent on July 21, 2019 Pros: Bright, optimistic colors, af good Cons: On aspc none Opinion: Exemplary purchase used in conditions equal to the new. Bright, blurry beautiful. My specimen focuses precisely (it's not a splinter); I mount it on Canon 2000d, it may seem a bit long, but I use it for portraits and I find it exceptional. The weight compared to the new Art series is contained. Happy to buy. Every time I review the portraits made with this lens on PC I marvel at its colors and sharpness. |
  | sent on June 18, 2019 Pros: Opening max f1.4, 77mm filters, low weight, handling, standard lampshade. Cons: Building material? Opinion: After trying on Canon 6d, 6dmk2, 80d a prime lens like the 35mm f1.4 Canon 1st and 2nd series and a sigma art 35, I wanted to try a first 50mm. The cheap choice, excludes the more expensive canon series L f1.2. The other optics in the Canon house are two, the plastic Canon 50 f1.8 stm (I am not fond of this system) and the canon F1.4 usm. Discarded the 50 f1.4 art, due to the weight, cost and repeated problems read of f/b focus, there remained only this "old" and out of production sigma. Found for less than 300 euros new on Amazon, including a lampshade and a rigid bag I decided to give it a try. Build quality a little poor compared to you Canon L series, but I think better than the two cheap-range Canon models the stm model and the usm model. Compared to the model Canon stm is well built, although it has that patina or velvety veil that covers all the optics (prelude of the old sigma before art and sport ....) It's not tropicalized (but I don't care) it's not stabilized (but with a max aperture of F1.4 I don't think it's going to do much). High-impact optics: mounting 77mm filters is very handy, practical and with a low weight. The Canon f1.4 with 58mm filters gave me the impression of being a little small, and difficult to handle, let alone the stm model that opts for 49mm filters.... In the practical field, which is what matters, it behaves well. It does not suffer from f/b focus either on apsc or ff. A Ta detailed photos, clear, excellent detachment of plans, excellent broker, true and bright colors. Af lightning, does not miss a shot , a little chromatic aberration that disappears closing by a few stops. Closed at f 2.8 or f4 is a wonder. I can't compare it to the recent sigma art 50 , But I can say I had two bad experiences with two models of art 35 cause f/b focus on both , I think this "old" series is more reliable and does not create problems than the latest art. All I can do is advise him. Despite being a model out of production. |
 | sent on May 04, 2018 Pros: Construction, sharpness, AF weight Cons: Nobody Opinion: I bought this optics a long time ago for video and did not take even a picture then I gave it away, today I felt the need for a fixed lens and I had projected towards 50 Art but then a friend had for sale this version. Honestly I got to try it before buying it and I was immediately amazed by its quality and especially by the strong detail at F 1.4. The precise and fast AF, the weight content that tends to a strong balance of the machine, faithful colors and excellent construction, also presents very imposing mounted on the machine being a 77mm and with the hood is also more charming and ritrovandolo me I regret having it sold then but happy to re-have it bought today.. |
 | sent on December 28, 2017 Pros: Construction, brightness, fast and silent AF, good image quality. Cons: In a situation of strong contrast, slight overexposure compared to Canon lenses. Drop of sharpness at the edges with very open diaphragms Opinion: I recently bought it, bought at a price (250 € for a copy that is truly indistinguishable from the new one) which I think is very advantageous. I took a few test shots and I share the first impressions, which are perhaps a bit superficial but have the gift of freshness and spontaneity.rnComplessivamente the viewpoint to be taken: the few and marginal defects are laughable compared to the robust quality that manifests. Let's start from the defects: rn- Softness to angolirnLa consider negligible: just diaframmare of a stop (even less ...) to solve the problem substantially, and then when you work below F2 you want to detach the subject from the background, what is on the edge usually blurs on purpose ... It 'a problem to which it is appropriate, in my opinion, in a picture of ten thousand ... rn- SovraesposizionernI noticed that in very bright scenarios and / or in conditions of strong contrast, makes me more exposed images compared, for example, to 17-40 L (body Canon 7d). It is only a matter of framing the characteristic (such as considero, more than a defect) and to avoid exposure compensation. It seems to me that other lenses suffer too.rnrnUnder with the merits! Rn- CostruzionernNon I've ever manipulated totems like Zeiss or Leitz, but I think it at the highest levels, much higher than the "poor" Canon, better than the Samyang 14 (which in its little one is made up with cement ...) and absolutely comparable to 17-40 L. The MAF ring nut and the couplings (bayonet, lens hood, filter holder thread) are very precise and (rightly) a hard spinner: there are no games and parasitic lights, you have to put a bit of "hand" but then everything is still in place, as it should.rn- AFrnWhat you expect from an ultrasonic. Nothing less. If it's dark, maybe it's a couple of ballets before hanging on, but there's ... there'll be better, there's certainly worse, but it's a point of merit.rn- ColorirnBelli, well balanced, a little colder than those of 17-40 but still pleasant, of fully comparable qualityskillful and the difference is personal taste.rn- Quality imaginernNitido and well contrasted, a requirement that associated with the quality of colors makes it a very good piece of kit.rn- Equipment and accessorirnRicca and high quality. Lobe-shaped hood that cracks in the attack with a bit of effort, but then it is stable and granitic, does not move, does not dance, it will never be lost. Soft case from Sigma, excellent robust cordura, padding and inserts well made, solid strap to attach it to life. To be ashamed of Canon ... rnrnIn summary, I consider it a very high level optics, a solid choice, convincing, rational.rnCopre all needs, if you want the impossible you have to go to talpone, Art or Zeiss .rnFrom what I see and read, the other high quality lenses if they play there goes there on a par, with +/- differences that do not make substance in almost all situations. Regarding the price (let's say under three hundred for a perfect piece in all) I struggle to imagineget something cheaper. Rating 9, just because it is a step below the maximum desirable. Highly recommended to those who choose with their heads and also needs very high, but not exasperated and can afford to pay attention to the cost. Last note: has an important window and you have to budget some more deca for filters, but it's worth it.rnrnP.S. I'm having a lot of fun with the extension tubes: with a 21 mm you shoot at approx. 30 cm from the subject, with a 31 mm it becomes a kind of microscope to incool the subject to the lens. If you do not pretend to work with a 1: 1 ratio, you can make excellent shots even freehand (if you do not exaggerate with coffee ... ;-)) .rn |
 | sent on September 18, 2017 Pros: Dimensions, materials, lightning fastness, colors, contrasts, tones, sharpness, aesthetics in general. Cons: Imprecision AF, better to use it on machine bodies with micro adjustment, compared to the canon has less resistance to the flare ... of a bit soft to 1.4, easily consumable rings (typical of sigma) Opinion: Purchased recently to replace the canon 50mm stm, what to say, large aperture, excellent colors, made very contrasted in features, especially where there are many details, excellent handling and strength, comfortable for big hands, is not like the others " fifty years "that having a small construction, then make the handling and grip of the machine body difficult. The autofocus is really lightning thanks to the ultrasonic motor, in my case, however, at the time of shooting I found small changes in axis with the central point, which strangely does not happen with the side ... good sharpness when used in TA, but at 1.6 is better, 1.8 is completely sharp and sharp ... I highly recommend it to those from a fifty 1.8 can not pass to fifty high-end, also because in the used it sells for just under 260 euros .... highly recommended ! |
 | sent on December 12, 2016 Pros: Weight, size, cost, brightness and sharpness Cons: Af not always accurate at f1.4 but I also found on the new version. Opinion: Excellent construction and beautiful to look at, from f1.4 to f1.8 is soft compared to the new version but more compact and lightweight, precision AF is basically like 50 1.4 art.rnLa because that made me prefer this lens than the new model is the price flea ... I found it to 270euro like new, with one year warranty and one month trial. |
  | sent on April 10, 2016 Pros: Quality / price, magical images and trimensionali. Brightness and sharpness. Cons: Focus a little uncertain but perhaps because I have read so much, I reserve Opinion: Beautiful. As usual I was a little time to ponder the purchase and I saw that in many parts of the forum and other sites are so many comparisons with the canon. I myself come from a Canon 50mm 1.8 II. I thought a picture with obvious differences, but I did not expect much. And 'certainly a beautiful lens with a fantastic price-quality ratio (bought used 260 euros). I was concerned by known mesa focus problems but in my 50mm I do not seem very evident and it works well. A merit to the "body" of a 6D becomes "important." This is a feature that I like. Certainly better balanced 50mm Canon II. In conclusion, it is thinking about a change with Canon 1.8 proceed ..... !!!! Really nice! |
| sent on October 10, 2014 Pros: Brightness, blur, building, Cons: I've found so far .... maybe the weight Opinion: According to a fixed lens that I used, but in perfect condition, (the first was a 35mm nikon 1.8), and it 'a great lens result for portraits and more .... rnLo use with a nikon d90.rnOttima the construction of the size of the lens is enore. Great indoors and outdoors rnPremetto I am not an expert but more 'than anything else a autodidatta.rnPer me anyway is a good buy. |
 | sent on September 19, 2014 Pros: sharpness, bokeh Cons: weight Opinion: I have the previous version of the 50 1.4 Art, purchased in 2012 that I use on a Canon full formato.rnE 'a disarming clarity, the auto focus I have never missed a shot. The aberrations that presents in shots where there is' a lot of contrast can be removed easily with Lightroom. Since I bought it I can not 'help it. I use it primarily in the concerts in places where light and 'really poor and I was never disappointed. I also used to make video on the 5Dmk2 without any kind of problem. I consider this viewpoint excellent (I had the canon 50 1.4 that has nothing to do with this gem). |
| sent on August 02, 2014 Pros: Opening, construction, blurred, sharpening, price Cons: Purple fringes in areas of high contrast (but very easy to remove ACR) Opinion: Bought used at the right time at a good price (during the release of the 50 Article 1.4) The copy in my possession is fortunately free from defects classic front and back focus, and for my needs, but the focus I have never given problems (I use mainly with static subjects) the copy in my possession has not rubbery but smooth finish that gives a sense of strength, focus and sharpness are very satisfactory results. |
 | sent on July 24, 2014 Pros: Sharpness, bokeh, color, contrast, made plastic, quality / price among the must-have. Cons: very few and insignificant. The af may be migliore.rnTi makes you wish the 50L 1.2. Opinion: And 'perspective that I bought 2 years ago and sold because the autofocus (inaccurate at different distances and with slight front focus) was not of sufficient utility on 5d old I owned and I used only in MF. After trying other 50mm, including 50L, I decided to buy it back for use on 5dmii ... The music has changed, the lens is always sharp from f1.4 to f16, with an exceptional bokeh and colors as excellent on 5d old. The af however, is greatly improved, now I can also hook up with laterali.rnDa immediately amazed me for the bokeh (comparable to 50L 1.2) and for the sharpness at any aperture, 2.8 already saturated sensor 5dmii. The love for the surrender plastic that gives the portraits and color balanced, but slightly yellowish shades average .... but this helps a lot gradations. rnDistorsione negligible and CrazyTalk at f1.4 of 1.7eV to extremes that fades very smoothly towards the center (I would have preferred it to be less, as the 50L) .rnQualità / unbeatable price, I pensator get closer to the new sigma 50Art which improves the defects and enhances the quality, but at that price + another sacrifice to reach the Canon 50L 1.2 which is the absolute yardstick. Dreaming of the Canon, I enjoy the Sigma 50 / 1.4, not ART ... of course! VOTE 9 |
 | sent on July 14, 2014 Pros: Sharpness, opening Cons: Ring maf hard, very precise. If you do not go to AF is not easy even in manual Opinion: Bought after having praised the qualities of big brother 85 does not disappoint. It seems a bit slow at times the focus. Very sharp, good bokeh. Compared to the 1.2 canon distance will also be significant, but so is the price difference ... I also believe that in some cases the high price of food a bit of mythology among those who can not afford to buy ... you have in mind those red cars with a stemmino black on a yellow background? |
 | sent on May 31, 2014 Pros: It comes very close to the quality of the Canon 50mm F1.2 L. Bright and sharp ... Cons: heavy Opinion: Very Beautiful. Purchased on a whim to test his 'reputation'. Actually very good. It has a huge front Lenton and compared to the Canon 50mm F1.2 L would say it is very, very close. Obviously, the Canon is slightly sharper but for what it costs I do not think that justifies the expense superior performance, since minor. AF system fast enough and it's nice to have it in hand, if not for the weight of the lens. However, more than CANON 50mm f1.4 suffering of his years. I did not believe .. try it! |
user24371  | sent on April 21, 2014 Pros: brightness, focus, precision, sharp TA Cons: coating construction Opinion: I own the first version and for what they say I've had bad luck with this specimen having absolutely no problems on both FF FB focusrnProvato that APSC is sharp since 1.4 obviously achieves greater three-dimensionality of FF! It is a great alternative of waiting 50 1.2 L of which definitely prefer the bokeh creative .. In fact, no matter how clear I prefer a lens with more character as the bokeh of the Sigma I find lacking in those characteristics that make you prefer a 'fixed lens to a handyman since the Sigma goes from blurry to sharp so far off ... but then again it is the only good alternative to Canon. I had no problems of shots thrown on the imprecisions of focus with no body on which I used in my case, 5d and 60d. Recommended for those who have a limited budget of course, personal opinion, better than the 50 1.4 canon. |
user6903 | sent on March 19, 2014 Pros: Brightness, blur is ideal for portraits, price Cons: Avoid early versions ... Opinion: Great lens, certainly better than the Canon 50 f1.4 suffering now the age of the project. For what it gives, the price / performance ratio is very good. I've had two copies and I found myself quite well with both, although I do not like the focal length of 50mm, I can say that it is a very practical lens. We recommend the purchase to anyone on a budget. |
 | sent on March 09, 2014 Pros: Resolution already at room temperature (when "it happens"), bokeh. Cons: Basically unusable for problems, apparently intractable, focus. Opinion: Very bad experience with this lens. To this day I find myself, after 2 and a half years of fruitless attempts at having to give up. Just purchased, after 4 days I I note the defects (in focusing on canon), I ask the seller to exercise the right of withdrawal (so that they can get a new copy) that denies me brilliantly. An early intervention through his shop, in fact useless. A second sigma, still under warranty, not decisive. The last 2 weeks ago, well-paying € 100 to get it back just a little 'better but still unusable. Has a discordant behavior in both the frequency with which it puts in focus as regards both the front / back focus. If you correct the defect to close it's gonna to infinity and vice versa. rnAnche reading on the net too many problems on Canon, therefore sconsigliatissimo. And Sigma definitely will not take a penny from me. |
 | sent on February 21, 2014 Pros: Sharp, bokeh, at room temperature is great, solid colors, lens hood. Cons: Difficult to find out ff Opinion: I have just this purpose but is already giving me so much. Unlikely I will separate. Autofocus very fast. It should be good for both street, for portraits (almost) to the landscape. A little bulky. It is soft and fuzzy F1, 4 there is not even a shadow of vignettaura. The construction is great, just take it in your hand you have a very good feeling. Recommended. |
| sent on January 09, 2014 Pros: Really remarkable image quality already at room temperature (f1.4), class-leading brightness and maybe even something more ', the blur is pure poetry, quick focus and super silent in any lighting condition, hardly the is separated from the camera body once tried. Cons: There are? really? maybe just maybe the weight and aside from some problems with the front / back focus (is perfect on my Nikon D2X) I could not really look for flaws. Opinion: Well ... I was searching for a fixed 50mm lens. to use on my D2X, machine dated but still respectable, I tried the 2 Nikkor 50mm f1 f1 .4 .8 and then AFS.rnFra 2, in terms of image quality I have not encountered abysmal differences (some , preferably 1.4 AFS) in the end, I was not thrilled, then, I had the opportunity to try this glass, what about ... there are no words to describe it, the building is really good it feels now! but the main attraction is undoubtedly its extraordinary lightness combined with a fast autofocus and silenzioso.rnIl Mine is a DX sensor and then a glass is great for portraits, which is already very, very good wide open and gives fuzzy sublime , almost poetic!. rnHo had the good fortune to take it used in like new condition for 350 coffee, a glass is exceptional I would not trade with anyone else! I recommend you try it with your own camera body, if you do not have problems with front / back focus, buy for unqualified, I do not dismount never again ', seeing is believing. |
 | sent on December 20, 2013 Pros: sharp, good files, sfocato.prezzo, Cons: guesses only 4-5 photos of 10 other out of focus ... Opinion: I took this lens with Sigma 35 more after trying the canon 50 1.4 and the dearest 1.2.ho got the new version with smooth plastic, which I find much better than the old gray plastic. I being a chef I took it with the intention of using it with the 100L for food photography well after trying to do the regolazzione the focus seems that the scale that reaches 20 is too short!. = (I'll try to take it in assistance and later sell it .. and a disappointment because the 50mm and a focal length that I like and I thought I had found a good compromise quality for money but I sbagliavo.non I recommend it even if the model I tried on the car of an acquaintance before finally aquistarlo was completely different. |
 | sent on November 13, 2013 Pros: Detail, focus, autofocus, construction. Cons: Nothing important Opinion: One of my favorite lenses, of 40d before and after 5d MkII. A constructive level is perfect, especially the newer versions with the new dark finish and omogenea.rnAl center is a real blade, even at room temperature, excellent colors and focus very pleasant and tridimensionale.rnL 'autofocus is very responsive and accurate, better any other 50mm.rn |
 | sent on November 12, 2013 Pros: Rugged construction with lots of glass of excellent quality, sharpness wide open, blurred very creamy, warm colors and natural resistance to flare. Exceptional lens, the best on the market for 50mm canon. Great price, now € 350. Cons: Overweight, glass front too exposed. Possible problems of front-back focus, not in my model. Correctable vignetting on FF with 2 clicks. Opinion: Exceptional lens for its huge build quality. And 'the best lens for canon at the time, it can not compare to the 50mm 1.2 L, otherwise risk of provoking a civil war, but its features are very close, at least for the use that I do. I got to try them both and read a number of reviews and tests around the net. Price, warm, natural colors and sharpness at full aperture make it a must to have in your kit, even if wearing a backpack is a little pesantuccio to be a fixed 50mm. The front lens being 77mm can be a double edged sword for those who use filters. With regard to the problem of front-back focus, of which my copy is free, it depends a lot on luck, if you have the chance to try it in the store is better, in any case on the bodies with microregolazion maf is correctable. However, it is always good to their optical tararare not to find themselves with shots to throw, especially because you play with depth of field is extremely limited. ANCh and the speed of focus in my specimen is very good. I highly recommend it. Now you can find it easily at 350 €. |
 | sent on October 26, 2013 Pros: Sharpness, construction, blurred, resistance to flare Cons: Weight, exemplary problems with F / B focus Opinion: I have a bit 'of time this lens, with which I am very well, I got it to replace the Canon 50 1.8 II, and needless to say it is another world, I am informed well before you buy it and at the end of the 'I did it and I can not be super satisfied, sharpness already TA, but it exceeds 2.8 up, practically a blade, excellent focus, the' Af is good, although it is a bit pesantuccio to be a fixed, 1.4 you are likely more than a few times cannare focus but which opening there is, and still just slightly close to resolve, shame that there are around a few copies that are suffering from f / b focus must be fortunati.rnNon know if is higher than the rival Canon, but to me I really like this lens, great for portraits. |
 | sent on June 17, 2013 Pros: Sharpness, construction, resistance to flare, colors, blurred good, no problem with the focus recent version used with canon 6D perfect Cons: None: the best lens ever used "quotes" for competition Opinion: A nice goal, in various colors and fuzzy, warm colors, use it for portraits and small monochrome photographs fairytale its 1.4 produces beautiful photos and crisp, the autofocus is fast and accurate on my Canon 6D no problem, in my highly recommended lens opinion, impeccable quality and price competition for a really good goal |
 | sent on February 18, 2013 Pros: Sharpness, blur, soft skin, resistance to flare. Cons: Size, front-focus. Opinion: Bought used from a user forum.rnE 'my favorite portrait lens, I had to use the AF micro-adjustment on both 7D that of 5D2, and with values ??very different from each other so I could also be a problem of reflex.rnA Apart from that I do not find other defects, the use for weddings and concerts as a lens in which the lights are always a problem. The focus is very good and bright spots are circular to f4, crystal clear even at full aperture, autofocus is fast and accurate. He has a great overall performance but I appreciate especially the complexion and the micro-to the maximum apertura.rnHo thoroughly tested four samples of Canon but none I liked how the Sigma. |
 | sent on January 22, 2013 Pros: Sharpness, focus, optical quality Cons: Autofocus Opinion: I can not stress this enough, but unfortunately with Sigma is a lottery. You're either lucky or you're not and I'm not stato.rnCon my first DSLR (Nikon D3000), I had problems with front focus and I had to adjust it to the service center. Now I use the film (Nikon F100) I can not calibrate it and I keep the front focus so I have to adjust the focus manualmente.rnA that, although it is a serious defect, sharpness already at full aperture is truly remarkable and allows use this lens in low light conditions without any problem (autofocus permitting). |
 | sent on November 26, 2012 Pros: Price, build quality, sharpness and colors. Cons: Softness at f/1.4, made the edges of FF. Opinion: I bought this lens used, but in conditions indistinguishable from the new 300 euro and I love it. I have a copy that does not have problems with AF, in my opinion, might be the only real problem with this obiettivo.rnNon say that it is comparable to the same focal length of Canon L as quality, but I find it more considering the quality / cost ratio. Obviously it is soft wide open but close enough to 1 stop to get good results and from 2.8 up is really a razor. The yield on the edge of FF is not great, but often set in portraiture is not so important, but it could become one if you decide to use it for landscaping, in any case, is worth more than it costs. |
 | sent on August 10, 2012 Pros: Very high sharpness from 2.8 up, excellent construction, nice blur. Cons: There is a risk of getting into a malicious copy, af impeccable. Opinion: I have purchased this goal from a trusted forum user and I have had some initial puzzles, so much so that I have decided to sell it. After taking a hundred photos I began to appreciate the lens. Sharpness is 2.8 inches high, 4 and 5.6 is gorgeous, so it is capable of fantastic color photos. From 1.4 to 2.8, it is usable, although the edges do not excel; blurry is pleasant. I decided then to sell it, especially because on all the sigma 50, af, sometimes, makes the whims, with the result of having some photos out of focus or having a veil. I can not snap with the doubt of what I'm going to do with my goal, so the desire for the 50's has vanished. In the Canon home with the fixed 50 1.8stm I found the problemarn solution |
user493 | sent on July 09, 2012 Pros: Blur, sharpen, construction Cons: Weight problems FB focus Opinion: I own this light for about one year and a half, is used on aps-c (7d) than on full frame (5D and 5DII) and you confirm a great lens. Already sharp wide open, it gives a good focus and a good yield contrast / color. Flaw in weight and in the "classical" problems of F / B focus typical of optical sigma. Very good construction, not in tropical climates (but I think it is a real problem) |
 | sent on March 20, 2012 Pros: - Good build quality - resolution Cons: - Focus from regular assistance Opinion: As soon as I got this lens I could not believe how many photos I threw away because of the focus. I tried the focus of the lens is what I found that I had arrived had a constant back-focus! I brought it in for adjustment assistance. Since returning is perfect! I recommend the store. |
 | sent on March 18, 2012 Pros: Sharpness, blur, building Cons: Sensitivity to problems of F / B focus Opinion: Before purchasing the 50 f1.8 Canon lens I had and tried the Canon 50 f1.4 always. In the first story there is of course, the second I liked but the Sigma amazed me. It has an incredible sharpness already at f1.4 (hey, some compare it to the Canon f1.2L). It has a great autofocus, fast and quiet. The build quality is excellent and it affects the weight but it does not bother me at all! Having to look for a flaw, I can only think that some samples suffer from front or back focus primarily on Canon. For me it is a minor problem because it can be corrected in the room (for the bodies that have the micro adjustment), send in assistance to calibrate or, as in my case, you get used to get a reference that takes account of the movement the point of MAF. Highly recommended! |
user4264 | sent on December 04, 2011 Pros: overall performance of APSC cameras Cons: made at the edges of cameras ff Opinion: From canonist huge I must say that this view is excellent. I do not own but I've had one on loan for a couple of weeks and I was amazed, especially when combined with the 7d. The fire was accurate, but not too firm in terms of f1, 4 wrong most focused of the canon, but nothing dramatic. The optics are optimized at the widest apertures and center, making it an amazing mezzotele on a APSC. In particular, 1.4 has not even a hint of fog from residual spherical aberration that ruin the results of the canon and planar at maximum aperture. This format is not heresy to compare it to canon 50 1.2 also because of a blur really buttery at the highest levels. Sadly 5d2 enthusiasm is drastically reduced due to the yield at the edges, but not bad at 1.4 exalted even to the central openings. The colors are good, and vignetting, CA and distortion very obvious, except of course the fall of light on 1.4 ff. Even the flare is well controlled, very good result given the "lentona" that is found in front. In conclusion between 9/10 and 7 + of APSC on ff. |
 | sent on December 04, 2011 Pros: Sharpness even at f/1.4, excellent focus, quality construction. Cons: Very heavy despite being a "small" goal. Opinion: It 's really a great lens, sharper than the Canon 50mm f/1.4. For portraits is great with cameras Asp-c. I do not recommend purchasing online for those who do not have a camera without micro adjustment of fire. My copy is perfect without any adjustment microaggiustamenti, but in many cases it can happen with a copy frontfocus or backfocus. in that case who does not have the micro has some problems. I highly recommend the purchase if you are interested in shooting in dark locations or for portraits with cameras Asp. |
user6500 | sent on November 30, 2011 Pros: Everything that is not the autofocus Cons: The autofocus on Canon Opinion: On a Canon optics with two faces (tested 4 copies and all the same), amazing in all respects except for the autofocus cane dramatically the 50/60% of shots. Qundo gets the focus right is crystal clear even at f 1.4, little vignetting, CA and distortion. Beautiful contrast and colors a little warm, but not too much like in other lenses Sigma. Excellent mechanical construction. I've tried 4 new in the store, and all 4 avevavo the same problem of autofocus with an average of over half of the picture more or less blurred. The problem, unfortunately, is so obvious and serious to strongly advise against the purchase of Canon owners. The problem of Nikon is almost zero, I say it because the fourth bad that we tried the negotiated intrigued has tried two with his Nikon camera and they were both pretty much perfect. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
