# Sigma 50mm 1.4 art vs Nikon 50mm 1.4g



## hamlet (Oct 1, 2014)

Sigma 50mm 1.4 vs Nikon 50mm 1.4g by hamlet on Photography Forum




f/1.4 by hamlet on Photography Forum




f/2.8 by hamlet on Photography Forum




f/4 by hamlet on Photography Forum




f/5.6 by hamlet on Photography Forum




f/8 by hamlet on Photography Forum




f/11 by hamlet on Photography Forum




f/16 by hamlet on Photography Forum




Sigma vs Nikon by hamlet on Photography Forum


----------



## Vince.1551 (Oct 1, 2014)

Seems like the one on the right looks better. Maybe it's visual myopia. Can you switch position? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Braineack (Oct 1, 2014)

I like the Sigma's bokeh transition better than the Nikons, there's a lot less CA.  But it looks very soft at f/1.4 in comparison to the Nikon.

It also looks to be about 2 stops lower in DOF compared to the Nikon which is interesting.  (e.g., at f/8 it renders like the Nikon at f/4)

But for an extra $525 I really don't see any reason to pick the Sigma over the Nikon.

It's three times as heavy, twice as long, twice as exspensive, and requires larger--more expensive--filters.


----------



## sscarmack (Oct 1, 2014)

I agree with Vince, to me the Nikon looks better, but like Brain said the bokeh is way smoother.

No thanks


----------



## hamlet (Oct 1, 2014)

sscarmack said:


> I agree with Vince, to me the Nikon looks better, but like Brain said the bokeh is way smoother.
> 
> No thanks


Would you say that it is barry white smooth?


----------



## sscarmack (Oct 1, 2014)

hamlet said:


> sscarmack said:
> 
> 
> > I agree with Vince, to me the Nikon looks better, but like Brain said the bokeh is way smoother.
> ...


Not quite Barry smooth...Maybe Keith Stone?


----------



## Vince.1551 (Oct 1, 2014)

Personally I don't really care about Bokeh. I'll rather my viewer focus at the subject matter then looking at the Bokeh haha


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Braineack (Oct 1, 2014)

Vince.1551 said:


> Personally I don't really care about Bokeh. I'll rather my viewer focus at the subject matter then looking at the Bokeh haha



you would if you had a lens that rendered like this: 
http://allphotolenses.com/public/files/users/image/14_jupiter_9_85mm_f2.0 bokeh jupiterf2.0.jpg

vs:
http://allphotolenses.com/public/files/users/image/13_minolta_md_rokkor_x_85mm_f2.0 bokeh minolta f2.8.jpg


----------



## Vince.1551 (Oct 1, 2014)

Braineack said:


> Vince.1551 said:
> 
> 
> > Personally I don't really care about Bokeh. I'll rather my viewer focus at the subject matter then looking at the Bokeh haha
> ...


The links don't seems to be working 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## sscarmack (Oct 1, 2014)

Bokeh allows more emphasis on your subject, more background separation, therefore making your subject appear sharper and like its the only element.


Maybe haha


----------



## Braineack (Oct 1, 2014)

work for me, must be since youre on your phone?


----------



## sscarmack (Oct 1, 2014)

Works for me, and huge difference!


----------



## Vince.1551 (Oct 1, 2014)

I guess so I just looked on my PC. Looks cool but ... I won't be overly crazy about it. Not something that can't be achieved or at least close to it. Plus I rarely shoot at wide open aperture. Maybe it's just my shooting style. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## sscarmack (Oct 1, 2014)

Too each their own


----------



## Vince.1551 (Oct 1, 2014)

I supposed so. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## waday (Oct 1, 2014)

Why is the bottle still full?


----------



## Vince.1551 (Oct 1, 2014)

It's waiting for you waday lol 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## waday (Oct 1, 2014)

I'll claim half, but no more...


----------



## Vince.1551 (Oct 1, 2014)

Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## astroNikon (Oct 1, 2014)

Does anyone else see a Font difference on the bottles.
It's like the Sigma has fuzzier edges and isn't quite as crisp and clean.

wait .. when I look at a higher f stop for the SIGMA then it looks better.  So it must be fuzzier at the various f stops vs the Nikon like Brian stated.


----------



## sscarmack (Oct 1, 2014)

astroNikon said:


> Does anyone else see a Font difference on the bottles.
> It's like the Sigma has fuzzier edges and isn't quite as crisp and clean.
> 
> wait .. when I look at a higher f stop for the SIGMA then it looks better.  So it must be fuzzier at the various f stops vs the Nikon like Brian stated.


Were you drinking some Jack? lol


----------



## Braineack (Oct 1, 2014)

the last bokeh ball comparison you just added shows nothing.  do the same thing you did with the whiskey bottle.


----------



## astroNikon (Oct 1, 2014)

sscarmack said:


> Were you drinking some Jack? lol



Nah .. I'm just used to seeing fonts and stuff from years of desktop publishing.  The earlier sigma fonts look slightly taller too higher f stops and vs the Nikon examples.  So the Sigma doesn't look as an accurate imager than the Nikon.


----------



## sscarmack (Oct 1, 2014)

astroNikon said:


> sscarmack said:
> 
> 
> > Were you drinking some Jack? lol
> ...


Interesting.


----------



## hamlet (Oct 1, 2014)

Hope these test shots helped some folks make up their minds.


----------



## Braineack (Oct 1, 2014)

hamlet said:


> Hope these test shots helped some folks make up their minds.


Do a better bokeh ball comparison .


----------



## JohnnyWrench (Oct 1, 2014)

If I were doing this test shoot, f/16 would be looking like f/1.4 by the time I was finished.


----------



## dannylightning (Oct 1, 2014)

I think the photos on the right look slightly better but.   at a quick glace its a wash,  if you really look and compare, there does seem to be a difference but I would not say its a big difference.


----------



## Scatterbrained (Oct 1, 2014)

Were these manually focused?


----------



## JacaRanda (Oct 1, 2014)

Would like to see what the testers at DxO would say or show.  Everything I have read shows the ART lens being significantly better than all 50 mm lenses in most ways except the one that costs thousands more.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## KmH (Oct 1, 2014)

sscarmack said:


> Bokeh allows more emphasis on your subject, more background separation, therefore making your subject appear sharper and like its the only element.


You're describing DoF, not bokeh.
DoF is adjustable. Bokeh isn't.


----------



## hamlet (Oct 2, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> Would like to see what the testers at DxO would say or show.  Everything I have read shows the ART lens being significantly better than all 50 mm lenses in most ways except the one that costs thousands more.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


In my opinion, the art seems to be sharper at 3:1 magnification. But that sharpness can easily be attained by pushing the sharpness slider just a little bit on the nikon 50mm 1.4g. The bokeh on the art also looks better to me, but that is a personal choice. All-in-all, the art lens is pretty neat, but not really worth paying double the price of the 1.4g unless you are a pixel peeper. 

Final score:  (two piglets a smurf and a cupcake)


----------



## JacaRanda (Oct 2, 2014)

I have the Artsy Fartsy.  It will come in real handy while out shooting birds. HUH??? 

Once I find a willing model (we do have 3 cats, but they are not always willing), I will put it through it's paces.  Not for comparison, but simply to use the darned thing.

Got the fantastic plastic 50mm and used it very little.  Fell in love with the whole Bokeh bokee bokey world.  Soon after, realized I did not care for the noise, the slow focus (indoors) etc.  So, went right past the Canon 50mm 1.4 to the Sigma Artsy Fartsy.


----------



## hamlet (Oct 2, 2014)

Well, for birdsters you shouldn't really be using the art lenses. Sigma has two other lines. One of them is called contemporary and the other one is called Sport. What you need is a sigma sport lens for that specific purpose. The art lenses focus on aperture hogs like me. I already own both the 18-35 1.8 & the 50 1.4 arts, hope to see some more art lenses, very excited for the future.


----------

