Hello all. I'm preparing to make the switch to Nikon, and as I do I'm looking for a good 50mm. I shot a lot with my Sigma 50mm on my now sold Canon 5D Mark II, and it was a great lens. I was very pleased with the sharpness at 1.4, and the bokeh was really pleasing. Should I expect the same from the Nikon version? Are they as finicky with the AF? Or should I just get the 1.8G lens? I'm not as concerned with the ability to go to 1.4 as I am getting sharp images. Any tips or advice is welcome. The lens will be going on a D800 if that matters.
As far as I know both Sigma mounts share the same optical design. IMO the 50G f/1.8 wins in all areas except for bokeh and lacking f/1.4. If you can live with those differences you'll save yourself a lot of time and aggravation by getting the 50G over the Sigma.
Nikon lenses don't really have any focusing issues, and you shouldn't have any with the Sigmas on a Nikon body either. I have owned the Sigma 85 and 30 1.4 versions and really looking forward to the 50. I expect to like it better than the Nikon 50 1.4 based on the colors and bokeh of many photos I've seen. And I liked the Nikon 50 1.4 better than the 1.8. Just my 2cents. They are not comparable lenses other than the fl, look at the amounts of glass in each and the different prices. 1.8 is a bargain and nice and light for sure though.
Thanks for the replies. Sounds like I need to do some searching and look at some images. I don't want to go through the Sigma lottery if that is an issue with Nikon like it is Canon. I was fortunate to get a good copy for my Canon. Maybe I should also consider the 50 1.4G as well.
I have owned all the Nikon AF 50 1.4s (and some 1.8s for that matter), and I definitely prefer the Sigma - it's the only one I would consider to be 'pro' quality. Not that you can't shoot 'pro' quality images with a $100 50 1.8, but the Sigma is the only one I would put in the same league as my 2.8 zooms and 1.4 primes. I'm selling my Sigma 50, but only because I have the 24G, 35G, and Sigma 85 1.4, and never use it any more.
There is something about how the 1.8G draws the background. Not super smooth but the way I like it. It is also sharper in my opinion, lighter, and cheaper. If you want super smooth rendering, Sigma is the winner.
Good lord. The Sigma simply OBLITERATES the Nikon 1.4 in the top wide open brokeh samples.
Not as sharp as others, but it's such a dramatically better rendering of OOF areas that it makes it worth the trade off, even with the added cost.
Still, when it's all said and done, the Nikon 50 primes blow away the canons. The 1.8G is incredibly impressive for the price and from what I hear, the 1.4 doesn't have the awful AF problems of the 50 1.4
Now if Nikon would only come out with a 1.2G with Sigma like OOF rendering...
Thanks! That is the perfect comparison there. While I really like the Sigma, I don't know that it is worth the price difference in the 1.8G. I'll have to think about it in the coming days.
I had the Siggy 1.4 and while the bokeh is better than all but CZ, or Leica, it was sketchy for AF consistency. I sold it after working hard to adjust to it.
Got the 1.4g and while the AF accuracy was much better, it too was less than consistent. I still have one of these lenses, but when I have reached for a fixed 50 lately, its the 1.8g I go for. Sharper and faster than the 1.4 at its widest ap (unfair comp I know), but my biggest reason is that it is consistently on target.
So, as with most things photographic, its a choice based on compromises.
Thanks for your opinion, David. I am probably going to go for the 1.8G. The bokeh isn't as nice as the Sigma, but I don't feel like playing the lottery either. It's a shame that the 1.4G isn't as sharp or as good with AF or I would just get it.
I have a Sigma 50 1.4, and it's one of the most reliable lenses I have, in terms of autofocus. Lots of keepers, lots of sharp eyelashes. It's more reliable than some Nikon lenses I have. The autofocus isn't zippy, but quite fast... fast enough for weddings. It's my primary wedding lens.
Having used the 1.8d, 1.8G and the 1.4 sigma.
I prefer the 1.8g. I've had 3 copies and all have been perfect. The focus is fast and they are sharp even at 1.8G. The 1.8 D wasn't in the same league until around 2.2
For the price it was a no brainer to keep the 1.8G.
The Sigma was a great lens, a bit warmer than what I liked. The focus was off on the 2 copies that I owned. One had to be returned for erractic focus. The other needed -9 or -12 adjustment to get it sharp. And sharp it was. Focus was slower than the 1.8G. A lot bigger in size if that matters.
I've had 2 Sigma 85 1.4s and they were both perfect, but I am now keeping the 1.8G which is faster to focus, lighter and cheaper. The bokeh isn't far off either.
I just picked up the 1.8G mainly for use as a walk around lens and I'm quite pleased. It's small, very light, sharp, and has good AF performance. I've had a few 50mm 1.4 Nikkors over the years and the 1.8g has better image quality than all of them . I was also surprised at how inexpensive it was - easily the best value per dollar out of all my Nikon glass. There is a bit of distortion but that's easily corrected in post.
