Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART lens: first serious test and review  (Read 8306 times)
joneil
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 135


« Reply #40 on: April 13, 2014, 09:32:28 AM »
ReplyReply

Sounds like a great lens, and i think the Sigma 35mm is a great lens too.  But an an aesthetic question here.

i never liked the 50mm format.  Not on film (on my FM2) and not on my full frame Nikons (d700 &800).  I have always preferred a 35mm as my "normal lens", or I like to go higher.  Even on my 24-70 nikkor, i cannot think of the last time i ever shot using it at the 50mm mark.

Many moons ago, i used to run into a lot of people who felt the same way,  back in the days of film.  Have things changed that much?  Bear in mind i am not questioning the quality of this lens, just the possible artistic demand for the 50mm size to begin with, regardless of who makes it or how much it costs.
Logged
kers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 728


WWW
« Reply #41 on: April 13, 2014, 11:23:46 AM »
ReplyReply

All the quibbling on which camera body and how it effects the outcome.

Put the lnes on a Nikon F6 or Canon F1n or EOS3. Use TMax 100 film. Shoot part of a roll of film in one body and then put it in the other if you think film bodies will have some effect.

Develop the film and go from there.

Some of us still shoot film and better lenses are always welcome.

Well it is a sure thing that not the lenses but the film(grain) was often the weakest link. Maybe you can try Technical Pan to limit that.
Nowadays the sensor ( 36MP on 135 format) shows to some extend the weak spots of the lenses. ( usually the corners)




Logged

Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7308


WWW
« Reply #42 on: April 13, 2014, 01:25:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Roger,

Welcome to these forums and thanks for sharing your experience!

Best regards
Erik

Bernard, we have about 30 of the Otus, but the one we loaned to SLR gear never got tested - it arrived the day before and we sent it straight to them.

I will say, though, that all of the ones we had tested were pretty similar. For that price point I'd hope that they would be.

Roger
Logged

joneil
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 135


« Reply #43 on: April 14, 2014, 10:50:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Well it is a sure thing that not the lenses but the film(grain) was often the weakest link. Maybe you can try Technical Pan to limit that.
Nowadays the sensor ( 36MP on 135 format) shows to some extend the weak spots of the lenses. ( usually the corners)

   I used to shot a lot of Tech Pan (still have some in the freezer), Kodachrome 25 and Ektar 25 print film, and in my own opinion, I find my D800 shows the weakness of a lens faster or greater than those films did.

   I say that because I still have my old lenses, and some of them I thought were either good or great, ones I used on those slow films, on the D800, you look and you go ...hmmm.... what was I thinking?


  Not wanting to start a range war or anything, but IMO, the D800 outclasses pretty much all 35mm films, but I still think my 4x5 and 8x10 outclass the D800.  If Nikon gets kinda crazy on us in the future and provides an affordable 4x5 CMOS sensor in a camera, it will be kinda cool to see which of my lenses works best on that.
Smiley
Logged
kers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 728


WWW
« Reply #44 on: April 14, 2014, 06:32:47 PM »
ReplyReply

  ... but I still think my 4x5 and 8x10 outclass the D800.  If Nikon gets kinda crazy on us in the future and provides an affordable 4x5 CMOS sensor in a camera, it will be kinda cool to see which of my lenses works best on that....
Smiley

 i have a nice 4x5 print on my wall ( provia100 and made with a stellar 58mm schneider) and i think it has about twice the detail of the d800e Smiley Never used 8x10- i bought a cheap camera and some cassettes, but never came to buy a lens...
the digital age had started; my darkroom now is a inkjet printer...
Logged

Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu
Raul_82
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 104


WWW
« Reply #45 on: April 15, 2014, 12:58:40 AM »
ReplyReply

It seems that The Digital Picture has completed the tests for the Sigma 1.4 art, a review has not been posted yet but that great website allows you to compare it with  Canon, Nikon and Zeiss models. I have to say I'm very Impressed, the Otus wins, but the Sigma is scary close. Don't even bother to compare it with what Canon and Nikon have to offer, it just became really hard to justify purchasing a Canon 50 1.2L, unless you need the weather sealing. Now we must hope for a decent autofocus.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=941&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=917&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

 

Logged
Misirlou
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 613


WWW
« Reply #46 on: April 15, 2014, 02:42:12 PM »
ReplyReply

It seems that The Digital Picture has completed the tests for the Sigma 1.4 art, a review has not been posted yet but that great website allows you to compare it with  Canon, Nikon and Zeiss models. I have to say I'm very Impressed, the Otus wins, but the Sigma is scary close. Don't even bother to compare it with what Canon and Nikon have to offer, it just became really hard to justify purchasing a Canon 50 1.2L, unless you need the weather sealing. Now we must hope for a decent autofocus.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=941&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=917&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Holy Cow. Really puts the Canon 50 f/1.4 to shame. Interestingly, the Canon 40 STM is not as far off the Sigma at the same apertures.
Logged
duane_bolland
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 60


WWW
« Reply #47 on: April 16, 2014, 12:38:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Holy Cow. Really puts the Canon 50 f/1.4 to shame. Interestingly, the Canon 40 STM is not as far off the Sigma at the same apertures.

The Canon 40 STM is a gem, especially considering the price.  When I bought my Sigma 35mm ART, I compared it to the 40mm, expecting it to be much better.  It wasn't.  I then did the comparison you saw and realized they were very similar with the 40 perhaps being better.  All of Canon's 50s are rubbish, but the 40 is great.  The only reason I got the Sigma 35 is because I needed more speed.  I can't wait to get my hands on the new 50. 
Logged
Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1762



WWW
« Reply #48 on: April 16, 2014, 08:33:38 PM »
ReplyReply

One of my test shots with the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG Art lens  was to see how it handled a strongly  back lit subject to  look for flare and chromatic fringing issues in a real world situation and also look at how it handled out of focus areas in both the foreground and background.  Given some of the comments I've read here and elsewhere,  I was pleasantly surprised.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2014, 08:38:20 PM by Ellis Vener » Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
Misirlou
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 613


WWW
« Reply #49 on: April 16, 2014, 09:41:35 PM »
ReplyReply

One of my test shots with the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG Art lens  was to see how it handled a strongly  back lit subject to  look for flare and chromatic fringing issues in a real world situation and also look at how it handled out of focus areas in both the foreground and background.  Given some of the comments I've read here and elsewhere,  I was pleasantly surprised.

Impressive
Logged
Misirlou
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 613


WWW
« Reply #50 on: April 16, 2014, 09:45:35 PM »
ReplyReply

The Canon 40 STM is a gem, especially considering the price.  When I bought my Sigma 35mm ART, I compared it to the 40mm, expecting it to be much better.  It wasn't.  I then did the comparison you saw and realized they were very similar with the 40 perhaps being better.  All of Canon's 50s are rubbish, but the 40 is great.  The only reason I got the Sigma 35 is because I needed more speed.  I can't wait to get my hands on the new 50. 

A few months back, I got a copy of that FoCal micro focus adjustment s/w. Using that, my 40 tested very, very strongly. Outstanding resolution for the money. The only real negative I have with it (aside from general slowness, which does not concern me for landscape work) is that manual focus is more difficult than I would prefer.
Logged
Willem81
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #51 on: April 22, 2014, 11:07:52 AM »
ReplyReply

It seems that The Digital Picture has completed the tests for the Sigma 1.4 art, a review has not been posted yet but that great website allows you to compare it with  Canon, Nikon and Zeiss models. I have to say I'm very Impressed, the Otus wins, but the Sigma is scary close. Don't even bother to compare it with what Canon and Nikon have to offer, it just became really hard to justify purchasing a Canon 50 1.2L, unless you need the weather sealing. Now we must hope for a decent autofocus.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=941&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=917&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Yes the Sigma looks nice (centre especially), but the Otus looks incredible, amazing contrast and acuity. What is the haziness called (in the sigma corner image) in photographic terms?
Logged
NancyP
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 814


« Reply #52 on: April 22, 2014, 06:06:22 PM »
ReplyReply

No question, we all would like Oti, but many of us will be happy to "settle" for Sigmas.   Cheesy
Logged
Petrus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 498


« Reply #53 on: April 22, 2014, 10:53:17 PM »
ReplyReply

No question, we all would like Oti, but many of us will be happy to "settle" for Sigmas.   Cheesy

With unlimited funds, maybe, if not for anything else than peace of mind, but for real use Sigma is more useful for me: AutoFocus…. (press photography).

I have had he Sigma on pre-order since last year.
Logged
kers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 728


WWW
« Reply #54 on: May 26, 2014, 12:28:17 PM »
ReplyReply

I allways wanted a better ta 50mm better than the nikkors avalable; Now i have it!
Just got the 50mm art lens for my Nikon d800e today;

first impressions-

really heavy - built like a tank.
a bit too short focus throw for my liking.
Fast autofocus: faster than the 1,8 50mm Nikon ( and then the 1,8  is faster than either the Nikkors 58mm and 50 mm1,4)
very near focussing.


As tested on a 20m distance brick wall:
flat field of sharpness
Open gives a very clear and sharp image. ( unlike the 50mm Nikkors) and improves to 2,8 with microcontrast. The image circle from the center to the top is really good at 1,4
Extreme cornes are very good at d5,6.
The lens is at 1,4 as good as my nikkor was at 2,8 with more microcontrast!
I like it! but will keep the small 1,8 nikkor for its lightweight and size.
« Last Edit: June 03, 2014, 03:48:23 AM by kers » Logged

Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad