p.1 #1 · Sigma 50 1.4 art vs Nikon 1.8g- 1.8G is great
Maybe I have a magical 1.8 g but other than the ability to achieve 1.4 the sharpness is close. Slight edge to the Sigma, but it's serious pixel peeping to tell them apart. By 2.8 they are identical. The 50 1.8G has a smoother bokeh. I still dig the 50. 1.4 Art, but surprisingly the 50 1.8g is very respectable. Does anyone concur?
p.1 #2 · Sigma 50 1.4 art vs Nikon 1.8g- 1.8G is great
Not me. The 50 f1.8G was pretty good for ~$200 lens. However, it was the weakest of the trinity...
28 f1.8G/50 f1.8G/85 f1.8G. AF in poor light was so so, IQ really good not great. The Sigma Art is on
another level entirely. Sharpness wide open thru f2.8 is obscene and no AF 50 even comes close. None.
Suggest you fine tune and/or dock the Sigma to see what it can really do. The MTF's don't lie. Game over.
It's nice you're thrilled with the G, I was more than happy to shell out the coin for the A and haven't looked
back. Love the heft of serious glass and it's proven to be a real money maker from day one. The A is SO hot.
p.1 #3 · Sigma 50 1.4 art vs Nikon 1.8g- 1.8G is great
I want to love the 50 art as much as I love the 35 art. Again maybe my 1.8 g is just a superb specimen. I'm going to dock the 50 art again and run through some more shooting but I'm just not getting a breakthrough on it yet. On paper I concur it should be a no brainer.
trenchmonkey wrote:
Not me. The 50 f1.8G was pretty good for ~$200 lens. However, it was the weakest of the trinity...
28 f1.8G/50 f1.8G/85 f1.8G. AF in poor light was so so, IQ really good not great. The Sigma Art is on
another level entirely. Sharpness wide open thru f2.8 is obscene and no AF 50 even comes close. None.
Suggest you fine tune and/or dock the Sigma to see what it can really do. The MTF's don't lie. Game over.
It's nice you're thrilled with the G, I was more than happy to shell out the coin for the A and haven't looked
back. Love the heft of serious glass and it's proven to be a real money maker from day one. The A is SO hot....Show more →
p.1 #5 · Sigma 50 1.4 art vs Nikon 1.8g- 1.8G is great
Meh, the 50 1.8g is, in my experience, one of the most overvalued lenses in the lineup, and it's bad enough that it has convinced me to never try the 28 1.8 and 85 1.8 (I am sure I am wrong there, but the disappointment was just big enough to steer clear of 1.8g primes altogether).
Mine has been a consistent underperformer (actually, for the few times I even bothered using it), with the only redeeming quality of being better – below f2.8 – than the even weirder 50 1.4 afs...
In my experience (2 samples), its trademarks are:
* mediocre resolution up to f2.5/2.8
* low contrast
* aberrations
* flare
* relevant focus shift
To summarize, just barely better than the old 1.8D it replaced...
Ahhh... God do I feel better now that I ranted and vented about it!
Don't know why I bought it (maybe I bought the internet hype about it, plus it just looked much sharper than the various 50 1.4afs in the shop!), but have been banging my head since, very frustrating purchase!
Of course, glad it works for the OP though! (although, it being on par with the fabled 50A sounds overly mysterious... OP'd better have the 50A checked to truly enjoy it)
Lory
p.1 #6 · Sigma 50 1.4 art vs Nikon 1.8g- 1.8G is great
I picked up the Sigma 50 and returned it within a few days. Couldn't get consistent autofocus to save my life. 1 out of 4 photos would be acceptably sharp. I'm pretty certain a firmware update would of fixed my issues, but nothing was/is available for the lens yet, so it went back to BH for a refund. Maybe I'll give it another go in a few months, but my 1.8G is a stellar performer, and for $200, can't really go wrong.
p.1 #7 · Sigma 50 1.4 art vs Nikon 1.8g- 1.8G is great
ilnonno wrote:
Meh, the 50 1.8g is, in my experience, one of the most overvalued lenses in the lineup, and it's bad enough that it has convinced me to never try the 28 1.8 and 85 1.8 (I am sure I am wrong there, but the disappointment was just big enough to steer clear of 1.8g primes altogether).
Mine has been a consistent underperformer (actually, for the few times I even bothered using it), with the only redeeming quality of being better – below f2.8 – than the even weirder 50 1.4 afs...
In my experience (2 samples), its trademarks are:
* mediocre resolution up to f2.5/2.8
* low contrast
* aberrations
* flare
* relevant focus shift
To summarize, just barely better than the old 1.8D it replaced...
Ahhh... God do I feel better now that I ranted and vented about it!
Don't know why I bought it (maybe I bought the internet hype about it, plus it just looked much sharper than the various 50 1.4afs in the shop!), but have been banging my head since, very frustrating purchase!
Of course, glad it works for the OP though! (although, it being on par with the fabled 50A sounds overly mysterious... OP'd better have the 50A checked to truly enjoy it)
Lory...Show more →
Well, you're right about being wrong. The 28 and 85 are both excellent.
p.1 #9 · Sigma 50 1.4 art vs Nikon 1.8g- 1.8G is great
Maybe I have an exceptionally great 50 1.8D and it's tack sharp without distortion unlike 50 1.8G. In terms of optics, 35 1.8G ED FX has both ED and AS elements, which sets it really apart from 50 1.8G.
p.1 #13 · Sigma 50 1.4 art vs Nikon 1.8g- 1.8G is great
Palmguy wrote:
Well, you're right about being wrong. The 28 and 85 are both excellent.
The 28's a solid lens, but suffers from fairly massive field curvature which results in it being distinctly poor for a lot of landscape applications. It's best used as a wide portrait/street/event lens.
p.1 #14 · Sigma 50 1.4 art vs Nikon 1.8g- 1.8G is great
mawz wrote:
The 28's a solid lens, but suffers from fairly massive field curvature which results in it being distinctly poor for a lot of landscape applications. It's best used as a wide portrait/street/event lens.
I didn't think field curvature matter at all in landscape...
p.1 #15 · Sigma 50 1.4 art vs Nikon 1.8g- 1.8G is great
BenV wrote:
I didn't think field curvature matter at all in landscape...
Field curvature matters more in landscape than just about anywhere else except Architecture, particularly when not using UWA's.
Due to the field curvature on the 28/1.8 subjects at the same distance will not be in focus if placed near the edges of the frame rather than in the centre, however much closer subjects will be in focus at the edges.
p.1 #17 · Sigma 50 1.4 art vs Nikon 1.8g- 1.8G is great
I'm dense - why isn't the more relevant comparison the Nikon 50mm f/1.4G? Still sub-$500 vs. the Sigma. Definitely has some distortion, but it seems like Lightroom has that figured out pretty well...
p.1 #18 · Sigma 50 1.4 art vs Nikon 1.8g- 1.8G is great
M635_Guy wrote:
I'm dense - why isn't the more relevant comparison the Nikon 50mm f/1.4G? Still sub-$500 vs. the Sigma. Definitely has some distortion, but it seems like Lightroom has that figured out pretty well...
The 50/1.8 is generally considered to be the better performing of the two Nikon 50 G's (this is traditional, the older 50/1.8's and the 50/2 before them also generally outperformed the faster 50/1.4's)
p.1 #19 · Sigma 50 1.4 art vs Nikon 1.8g- 1.8G is great
I completely agree with the OP, except when it comes to big dreamy flare. If you want big flare the 1.4G is better. But if you post a shot at f2 with the 58, Art, 1.4G, and 1.8G there won't be much of a difference. The point is, you better shoot at 1.4 a lot to justify any of the other lenses.
p.1 #20 · Sigma 50 1.4 art vs Nikon 1.8g- 1.8G is great
ohsnaphappy wrote:
I completely agree with the OP, except when it comes to big dreamy flare. If you want big flare the 1.4G is better. But if you post a shot at f2 with the 58, Art, 1.4G, and 1.8G there won't be much of a difference. The point is, you better shoot at 1.4 a lot to justify any of the other lenses.
Actually while there's little difference between the two 50G's at f2 (the 1.8 will focus faster, but otherwise little difference), the 58G on the other hand will have notably less DoF (about equivalent to f1.6 on a 50) and smoother OOF rendering, due respectively to the longer focal length and the optical design. The 50 Art at f2 will be much sharper near the edges than either of the 50 G's but otherwise similar.
