I would like to know what users of the Sigma 50mmf1 4 feel

I would say that Sigma is a great head.

It is more expensive than the original head, but it is expensive for a reason, whether it is the feel, workmanship, or the performance of the outside of the focal point is better than the original factory. Sigma is a 77mm diameter, and it looks like I like this kind of big eyes. Then there are 9 curved aperture blades, so it makes his focal point more oily.

However, there are individual differences in Sigma's lenses, which means that some are good and some are bad, so you have to try a few more, especially for the problem of zooming.

Canon 50 preferred.

My own equipment is 40d+50l

Used 50 and 50 colleagues).

There is no weak brigade in the header.

I feel that there is not much difference between 50 and 50L The colors are quite good 50 is slightly lighter EF 50 The maximum aperture is slightly softer, but this aperture value is no longer looking at sharpness, but also looking at the feeling and taste.

The maximum aperture of 50L is also very soft, but the flavor is quite strong.

Originally, I still had 2470L, and the edge and sharpness of 50 were slightly better in comparison.

Sigma's 50 has not been used, but after looking at the comparison on the Internet, I can't see the gap, maybe Sigma's purple edge is slightly better.

However, the mechanical performance of Sigma is obviously inferior to Canon, this head has only been sold in the early 3000s since it just came out of 4000+, and it feels like there is a problem, and the repair rate of Sigma has always been very high, so it is not recommended to buy.

In addition, the caliber of the Sigma 50 is actually 77mm, which is larger than the 72 of the 50L, and the UV mirror CPL is also much more expensive.

So the same aperture is not as good as buying the original factory, the imaging is good, and it is cheap, why not choose it, buy a lens, or choose a cost-effective one, you have to feel cool, no matter how large the aperture is, it is not as good as a red circle.

Coincidentally, it has only been used for a few months.

Mine is Nikon's, though.

First of all, the large caliber is very cool.

Secondly, focusing is fairly fast.

The background blur is also flavorful enough.

If I choose.

Choose it between the original and it.

What about the downsides. One is out of focus (I think this is a common problem with large diameters) and the other is yellowish in tone.

It was 2800 when I bought it

All things considered, the Zeiss 50 is preferred.

1.In terms of workmanship, Zeiss's all-metal mirror body has a very strong sense of cross-ring damping, you don't want to use other brands if you have used it, Sigma's 50 coating is easy to peel off, I heard about the latest improvements. I don't know how, 2When it comes to imaging, ZEISS has intense colors. The coke is sharp, the coke is and the cream is generally open.

The Sigma 50 is very sharp, the only drawback is that the image is slightly lighter, depending on personal preference.

3.In terms of focusing, the Sigma ultrasonic motor is much, much better, Zeiss needs to be manually aligned, I can use 85 full open focusing, it is not as difficult as I imagined, and it is more difficult to capture.

4.In terms of weight, the Sigma is slightly heavier, and the Zeiss is also heavy, 5In terms of size, Sigma is a lap larger, and the caliber is super large. It looks scary. Compared to Zeiss's more low-key, Liangsao preferred Sigma.

6.When it comes to coatings, Sigma's coatings are widely considered to be the worst and easy to scratch, and ZEISS's T* coating is currently the top process and is the lifeblood of ZEISS. Coating affects imaging. Think for yourself.

7.In terms of value preservation, it is difficult to sell the head of Sigma for more than 2 years. The mechanical properties have deteriorated significantly. ZEISS retains its value better.

1.If it must be these two on the D80, then on the Sigma. Because Zeiss's head can't autofocus, the focus success rate is too low, I used it on the D200, it should be one level higher than the D80 can't see clearly, and then I changed the focus and cracked the phase still can't work, and I can't bear the pain to get the head out.

The conclusion is that the manual head must focus at full frame to be able to see clearly.

2.Don't believe anything out of focus. In fact, the head of each family runs, and the key is the ratio of how much to run. I've used a few Sigma heads, and I haven't found anything out of focus. This is an excuse for businesses to attack each other.

3.This head of the Sigma is better than the AF of Nikon. The dish is the best burnt, the color is a bit virtuous, but the taste is not very sufficient.

At present, there are few German head users, which is related to the color adjustment of German flavor in the later stage. Nikon's head is unstoppable, like a knife.

T* ZF is capable of automatic metering, but it doesn't mean much. Because of the problem of metering, you can rely on experience or look at the histogram, but the focus does not make the computer unable to see clearly.

Dizzy. You might as well buy an original Nikon 50. I don't know what you do with it, if you take portraits it is recommended to go on 85

This 50 must be very famous, better than the original factory, but you have to choose well, it seems that there are individual cokes. And this one is more expensive than the original factory, after all, it is the façade of a dead horse.

Canon users are still honest and practical to the original factory...

Canon machines are not compatible with Sigma lenses well... Easy to get out of focus...

And the 350d has no fine-tuning... It's better to use the original factory. . .

In any case, Sigma is just a side factory, and it can't be very high, and many people think it's expensive to be almost 5000 now. Many people choose the head of the deputy factory because of the good cost performance, which is cheaper than the original factory. Canon's 50 won't talk about it, because it's been out for too long, and it's older than Sigma's.

Generally speaking, the selling price at the time is about this price, and the parallel price should be about 4500 I think.

That 55 2w4 or so from Zeiss.

Each has its own advantages.

In terms of price-performance ratio and fuselage fit, the Canon is slightly better;

In terms of mechanical structure, Sigma is slightly better.

In fact, this Bai Sigma head** is on par with the original du, do you feel confused? In fact, it is because of the optical quality of the DAO lens.

It is more than the original, with nine circular diaphragms, super coating, and a high-precision ground aspherical lens, all of which are much better than the Canon of 20 years ago. The only drawback is that it's easy to get out of focus... If you choose a good one, it is definitely better than the original factory. Hope to adopt.

These two 50 are not as cost-effective as EF50MM.

Sigma is easy to use, after all, it is more than 1000 expensive, but it is more serious to run the focus on Canon's machine.

It's all pretty much the same. The low-end lens can't be seen.。。 You see which one is right to buy at that price.

Sigma adjusted four today, and I didn't like any of them, all of them were out of focus, I was 7D, and when I was able to shoot up the aperture close-up, the image from 5 meters away was blurry. Fine-tune the focus, the image is clear at a distance of 5 meters, and it is not good at a distance of 2 meters, so continue to run.

Canon didn't use it.

The first is definitely in terms of price, Sigma has the advantage, and the portrait lens is definitely the winner of Canon.

A dead horse that doesn't run out of focus means that there is not much pressure.

I like them all, Sigma is better.

It depends on which fuselage you are.

1.If it is a body without a motor (D40, D40X, D60, D5000, D3000 without a motor), buy 50.

2.If it's a body with a motor, buy 50 . Many reviews have already been tested, and the difference between the Nikon 50 and the 50 is so minimal that it's hard to detect with the naked eye.

50 center imaging is a little better, 50 edge imaging is a little better. However, the ultrasonic motor used by Nikon on the 50 is a scaled-down version, and the focusing speed is only 1 3 of the mechanically driven 50. And 50 is almost 1,000 dollars cheaper.

3.Nikon users do not buy the Sigma 50. The Sigma 50 imaging is good, and that's for the Canon 50.

Compared to the Nikon 50, the Sigma is slightly better on the APS, but at full frame, the Sigma 50 has a much worse corner imaging than both Nikon 50s, but slightly better than the Canon's. The Sigma 50 is big, heavy and expensive, compared to the Nikon 50 and small and light.

The Sigma 50 is very good, with a 77mm diameter and a warmer color.

However, it is more reliable to choose the original lens, and the compatibility, stability, workmanship, and sealing are better than the Sigma head.

The Sigma 50 Gen 2 lens has a 46-degree angle of view in full-frame mode.

The imaging angle of a lens is related to its focal length and frame.

In full-frame mode, the imaging angle of view of lenses with different focal lengths is shown in the figure below

As can be seen from the figure, the imaging angle of 50mm focal length is 46 degrees.

Therefore, whether it is the Sigma 50 2nd generation or the Sigma 50 1st generation, as well as for 50mm lenses from other manufacturers, the imaging angle of view is the same (the difference between the actual focal length and the nominal focal length causes the angle of view to change, which is not in the scope of discussion).

This perspective is the closest to the perspective of the human eye. Therefore, the imaging effect of the ** shot by the lens of this focal length looks the most comfortable. In addition, this lens has a very wide aperture and can achieve good background blur and foreground blur capabilities, so it is best suited for portraits.

That's why these lenses are called portrait heads.

However, it is important to note that the perspective of this lens is always mentioned in the discussion of the concept of "full frame". So, how big is the angle of view of this lens in full-frame mode?

This shot itself is a full-frame lens, and there seems to be no need to discuss the situation of other frames.

However, this lens can be mounted on a frame body such as APS-C. Once it is mounted on a body of other formats, the imaging angle changes ......This is the concept ...... of the so-called "equivalent focal length".

As for how big the angle of view of this lens is in the new format, it depends on what its equivalent focal length is......The equivalent focal length is calculated, and then according to the data of the angle of view corresponding to the focal length of the lens in the chart, you can know how large the specific angle of view is.