I’ve had the Samyang 75/1.8 for about a year now. It’s a decent lens optically (though average AF) and a good compact/pocketable partner to the excellent Samyang 24/1.8
Finding a well centred Samyang is half the battle though 😉
Despite its flaws, all carefully mentioned here , I think it's still the best generalist 50/1.4 currently. It's a lot cheaper than 50ZA and probably more consistent throughout the frame. The issue of course is who will buy it, as it's still nearly 50% more expensive than the Samyang, which has its own advantages.
I hope the situation with 35 DN vs GM does not repeat itself, but it looks like it might be the case again (though I still hope 50/1.4 G(M) rumour is false ).
The new Samyang F1.4 seems very specialized to me. The old Samyang 50mm F1.4 is better stopped down for landscapes than the new version. Neither seem as generalist as the 1.8/55ZA. This new Sigma seems pretty well rounded, but I am not seeing where it is better than the 1.4/50ZA. The ZA may use a slower motor, but it supports faster tracking.
It is funny to read complaints about Samyang alignment consistency after watching Tony Northrup claim some mushy Lens Rentals 1.4/50ZA was normal. And all the other inconsistencies with other brands including this Sigma.
I bought a couple of Yongnuo YN50mm F1.4 that were very well aligned--the last one was only $79. It is a fairly large unit-focus design powered a DC motor--so not the most complicated lens, but still more complicated and better corrected than a C/Y Zeiss Planar or EF 50mm F1.4 USM. It is probably worse than say the old Sigma Art. Their native FE YN50mm F1.8S is very nice, but proportionally more expensive too.
These do make me wonder how $800 lenses can be so inconsistent. I am sure it has somewhat to do with accommodating fast linear motor(s). The more complicated a lens is the more chances for things to go wrong. I had the Tamron SP 45mm F1.8 VC USD for a while which seems still to be the only normal prime with optical stabilization, but it still used old-style piezo-electric ring drive for AF. I also had a couple of the non-VC version of that lens, which seemed to be sharper. These are also rather hilariously bulky compared to the Samyang 45mm F1.8.
i also will probably pick up this new sigma 50 or the coming 1.4 gm. i would like to see more side by side portrait comparisons with the other 50s first though, and with the coming gm. from what i can tell so far i think i like the look this 50 dg dn is providing in the portraits i've seen, but its still early for me to be sure. my main complaint though is the optical vignetting. i wonder if there is a trade off between rendering in some way and correcting optical vignetting. does anyone know or have thoughts about this?
My worry is with the af consistency at 70% from mark aldheff's review where its back focusing with eye af on a sony a1. That's not encouraging and big reason I've been switching to more sony glass lately. I do not expect 100% but 70% for a new lens doesn't excite me.
Plus it seems to me like the optical performance isnt that much of an improvement tho dustin abbot said good things about it, and Christopher frost too. So it's sort of a mixed bag but for $800ish you can't really expect a lot.
I would wait for the new 50 1.4 gm lens and see how that goes later this month. I am sure sony will nail that as they've just been putting out such amazing gm/g glasses lately. Anyhow I am sure it will appeal to those that don't have a 50 1.4 af lens.
It looks like the lens is a solid improvement over the prior HSM version. If Sigma is competing against its prior lenses, this is a winner. Sony has raised the bar high on its recent GM primes expecting a 95% equivalent at 50% or less the price may be a bit unrealistic. I had the HSM version in EF mount adapted with an mc-11. I didn't have any optical complaints, but the focus wasn't accurate enough. Also the size and weight was larger than I cared for.
The new DN is already available with an EDU discount for $764, that looks like a pretty good value. Not sure what to make of the focus misses by Mark Aldheff, his lens seems softer than what others are seeing, maybe his lens has a problem that affects focus and sharpness. Given this is a new motor, the focus algorithm might not be fully worked out yet and a firmware update would help. My main reason for hoping for the new motors would be better focus accuracy as I see that as my primary complaint with Sigma. I didn't see the other reviewers talking about missed focus.
Tony Northrup compared to the prior Sigma, Zeiss, and GM. The GM was sharpest in the center followed by the new Sigma, old Sigma, and Zeiss. In the corner the new Sigma beat the GM. In the announcement Sigma talked about trying to get uniform performance across the entire field.
I guess for me the cost looks good, I think the optics would be fine with minor LoCa irritations. For me the jury is still out on focus accuracy. I wish it was smaller and lighter. Will be waiting to see what the rumored 1.4 GM brings.
All those reviews don't make much sense together.
I can't believe the Sigma is sharper in the center than ZA, nor 70% eyeAF hit rate. Oh, and it seems some copies don't show any onion rings ...
j4nu wrote:
All those reviews don't make much sense together.
I can't believe the Sigma is sharper in the center than ZA, nor 70% eyeAF hit rate. Oh, and it seems some copies don't show any onion rings ...
I suspect in many cases the copy to copy variation is larger than the difference between different brands. Looking at Mark's images, some of them clearly missed focus. Looking at Tony's images I agree with his ranking as well. Tony shoots at 240mp for sharpness evaluation. Could he have missed focus on the Zeiss, or the GM has minor field curvature, maybee? Tony and Mark often shoot the same stuff with each lens and will show you comparison images. The Zeiss was softer than I expected in Tony's photos. He said it was similar to prior testing he had done, and it was a copy from Lens Rentals.
The onion rings didn't look bad to me, maybe not GM quality, but OK.
tschopp wrote:
I suspect in many cases the copy to copy variation is larger than the difference between different brands. Looking at Mark's images, some of them clearly missed focus. Looking at Tony's images I agree with his ranking as well. Tony shoots at 240mp for sharpness evaluation. Could he have missed focus on the Zeiss, or the GM has minor field curvature, maybee? Tony and Mark often shoot the same stuff with each lens and will show you comparison images. The Zeiss was softer than I expected in Tony's photos. He said it was similar to prior testing he had done, and it was a copy from Lens Rentals.
The onion rings didn't look bad to me, maybe not GM quality, but OK....Show more →
Yeah, for sure copy variation is at least partially to blame, as much as testing methodology probably. My point is mostly that it's hard to tell how the Sigma actually stacks up to other 50/1.4 options due to this...
As for the onion rings (at least those shown by Tom Calton & DPR), they cross the threshold for a modern $850 fast fifty for me... but then I do tend to notice them easily due to how I often shoot.
I've just watched Tony's video and ZA's performance there is a joke. Zeiss should sue him for defamation ...
“6 Conclusion (English)
The Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG DN (949 euros) is a classical full fledged 50mm F1.4. At this price tag some compromise have been made.
On the positive side it has excellent consistency across the frame, very good bokeh and color rendering, excellent ergonomics , excellent sharpness as of F2.
On the negative side sharpnesss is only very good wide open on 61Mpix, it has important distortion, high level of Chromatic aberrations.
Size and weight are average. AF is a mixed bag : excellent in burst mode , but sometimes failing with back focus issues with the standard eye AF
The main alternatives are
The Samyang 50mm F1.4 AF II (700 euros) much lighter, sharper wide open in the centre but less good in the corners and for bokeh , background blur
If you can afford it the Sony Planar T* 50mm F1.4 Zeiss (1500 euros) is superior and
The Sony 50mm F1.2 GM (2300 Eur) is the best 50mm you can get.”
All 50/1.4 have that pop though, depending on where the photographer stands. I kind of want a 50 for my indoor wedding work, but I’m waiting to see the new GM. If it’s $1500 I may just buy the Sigma (clients dont know the difference)
Alan Parker wrote:
There's quite a bit of 3D pop! That alone could be a selling point for some.
Looking at the Dustin Abbot review, the lens is looking pretty good. He said no focus issues with the focus during a portrait shoot. I’m not hearing focus issues from other reviewers. Looks like a competitive lens.
, I think it's still the best generalist 50/1.4 currently. It's a lot cheaper than 50ZA and probably more consistent throughout the frame. The issue of course is who will buy it, as it's still nearly 50% more expensive than the Samyang, which has its own advantages.
).
...