How does Sigma 50mm f/1.4 compare to the Canon 50mm f/1.4

Sharpness, autofocus speed and over all value. Which would you vote for?

Well I own a Sigma 50 1.4 (for Nikon) and a 50 1.4 in the past for Canon.

I prefer the Sigma, but there's a caveat:

Sigma has some QQ issues. If you don't get one that's properly calibrated (which is likely) you'll need to send it to Sigma to get calibrated. This isn't a real problem with Nikon as you can just use micro adjust. But with Canon there's problems with the Sigma 50 1.4 missing focus depending on where you focus (use micro adjust on Canon to get it right when focusing on something close and it will miss focus on things in the distance).

So if you're shooting Canon, be prepared to send the lens to Sigma to get calibrate. This is the reason why I put off getting a Sigma till I got a Nikon. Now I love it, really nice lens on FF especially.

My sigma wasn't perfectly calibrated out of the box, but i just added a small amount of Micro-adjust and now it's really sharp.

IMHO the bokeh of the Sigma is better than the Canon (to me quality bokeh on a 1.4 lens is really important, more important than sharpness perhaps).

Sharpness is about the same.

Build quality is similar

Focus speed is about the same.

I found the sigma to be MILES better than the canon 1.4. I had both for quite a while. Sigma is faster af (newer model has HSM) and sharper, better contrast, bokeh and build quality. It is also a newer design with more modern lens coatings. It's unfair to compare it to the canon f1.4. I rate it up there with the canon f1.2 L.

Doesn't the 1.2L have focusing issues too?

Not the one I used. I microadjust all my primes wide open and find it does the trick. If I'm shooting something a bit closer or further away than my usual distances I will maybe tweak my adjustments a little bit. Most of the people struggling with the f1.2 or 1.4 are probably using center focus then recomposing and at those apertures you are going to move that razor dof. It's also worth noting that when you microadjust you need to stick to the minimum recommended distances for the focal length of the lens or you will get the focus nailed at some distances from your subject and not others. If you have issues with focus shift just adjust to the aperture you use most!

Chris Davie wrote: Not the one I used. I microadjust all my primes wide open and find it does the trick. If I'm shooting something a bit closer or further away than my usual distances I will maybe tweak my adjustments a little bit. Most of the people struggling with the f1.2 or 1.4 are probably using center focus then recomposing and at those apertures you are going to move that razor dof. It's also worth noting that when you microadjust you need to stick to the minimum recommended distances for the focal length of the lens or you will get the focus nailed at some distances from your subject and not others. If you have issues with focus shift just adjust to the aperture you use most!

It's focus shifting caused by floating elements. You're not going to find a good copy(in this aspect), they all display this. It's a very WELL KNOWN problem with the lens.

I've seen really good results with the lens though, and enjoyed using it.

Scotty wrote:

Chris Davie wrote: Not the one I used. I microadjust all my primes wide open and find it does the trick. If I'm shooting something a bit closer or further away than my usual distances I will maybe tweak my adjustments a little bit. Most of the people struggling with the f1.2 or 1.4 are probably using center focus then recomposing and at those apertures you are going to move that razor dof. It's also worth noting that when you microadjust you need to stick to the minimum recommended distances for the focal length of the lens or you will get the focus nailed at some distances from your subject and not others. If you have issues with focus shift just adjust to the aperture you use most!

It's focus shifting caused by floating elements. You're not going to find a good copy(in this aspect), they all display this. It's a very WELL KNOWN problem with the lens.

I've seen really good results with the lens though, and enjoyed using it.

I heard this too (what Scotty said). It's part of the design.

That said, I do agree Canon users tend to do that focus and recompose thing more often than not because the AF on a lot of the models sucks (on my Nikons i just select the point I need and it focuses fine even when objects are moving). Doing the focus and recompose thing can and does shift the plane of view (especially at 1.2) and can mess things up.

Funny thing (as I mention above) the Nikon micro adjust seems to work better than the Canon one when adjusting for the Sigma 50 1.4. We don't get the focus shifting like they do on Canon cameras. Not knocking Canon at all BTW this is just observations made by myself and many ex-Canon users about this issue.

I like Canon. I have a Canon video camera.

I didn't notice any focus shift at all on my sigma 50mm 1.4, I did notice it on the 50mm L but microadjusting it to f1.2 at around 5 meters made it spot on, when I used it on other apertures the extra depth of field mitigated the problem somewhat. I suggest adjusting at widest apertures and to the reccomended distance for your focal length!

Conner wrote: Sharpness, autofocus speed and over all value. Which would you vote for?

I usually tend to say stick with your brand lens. But the Sigma 50mm is a good lens also. So in the end it may not matter.