Reading mode: Light Dark

News Reviews Articles Buying Guides Sample Images Videos Cameras Lenses Phones Printers Forums Galleries Challenges

What camera should I buy?

Now reading: The best 50 yet? Our Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM in-depth review 592 comments

592

The best 50 yet? Our Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM in-depth review

Item: Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM Art
Rating: 92
Author: Andrew Westlake

Published May 28, 2014 | Andrew Westlake

Buy on Amazon.com From $719.99

The Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM 'Art' is a fast normal prime for full frame cameras, with an unusually complex optical design. However at $950 / £850 it's substantially more expensive than either its predecessor, or Canon and Nikon's 50mm F1.4 lenses. We've already published lab test data showing that it's optically excellent, but what does this mean in real-world use? Read our detailed review to find out.

Read our in-depth review of the Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | Art

Read DxOMark's review of the Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | Art, including full test data

Tags: review

Gear in this story

Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM Art

699

I own it

475

I want it

I had it

Discuss in the forums

Shop now

251 customer reviews

US Version, Canon In stock Usually ships in 1-2 business days	From $779.00 »
US Version, Nikon In stock Usually ships in 24 hours	From $785.00 »
US Version, Nikon w/ Filter Kit In stock Usually ships in 1 to 2 months	From $1,027.00 »
US Version, Sigma In stock Usually ships in 1-3 weeks	From $1,376.80 »
US Version, Sony In stock Usually ships in 6-10 business days	From $939.51 »
Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Lens for Canon Cameras - International Version (No Warranty) In stock Usually ships in 1-2 business days	$719.99 »
Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Lens for Nikon Cameras - Fixed - International Version (No Warranty) In stock Usually ships in 1-2 business days	$719.99 »
Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Lens for Sony Alpha Cameras - International Version (No Warranty)	See price on Amazon.com »

View Comments (592)

Comments

All (592)

Most popular (15)

Editors' picks (0)

DPR staff (1)

Oldest first

Alex Moscow

Some guys describe back/front focus issues with this lens, seems Sigma does it with salling their USB-dock on the back of its mind (almost kidding :-)
My lens had +5 from the start... luckily, corrected fully with AF fine-tuning on my Nikon

2 months agopermalink

grammieb14

I have the Sigma 1.4 and Canon 1.2. The Sigma is sharper, but the Canon has better bokeh. I use them in different situations and will keep both of them. There are situations where one is appreciated more than the other.

Jul 23, 2017permalink

Noogy

I just bagged this lens last night and tried it on my 80D and my 5DMIV. Strange experience I have had, it seemed to focus better on the 80D at 1.4 and while this is not a thorough test I did, I'll share more info as I get to use the lens more extensively on both bodies. Anyone using this glass on a cropped body? How has it performed?

Jan 12, 2017permalink

Optilab

Sigma 50mm ART is really incredibly sharp - but only if you can get it properly focused. On my D750 I can get breath-taking sharp images if I focus it MANUALLY. However with auto-focus the story is much worse because it systematically back-focuses by .5-1.5 inch. I have tried to correct the problem using D750 "AF-fine tune" but it cannot solve the problem because the range of auto focus adjustment on D750 is insufficient. The next step will be to tune the focus on Sigma 50mm Art using Sigma USB-dock and Sigma tuning software. I have started this process but unfortunately it is NOT very simple and straightforward. I have heard and read about this problem from a number of other Sigma Art lens users so it is not unique to my case.

Apr 1, 2016*permalink

Optilab

As a matter of fact, if you search DPREVIEW forums, you will find many postings about this problem and a general GOOGLE search will yield many more.

Apr 1, 2016permalink

Optilab

After spending a day trying to fix the AF problems on my Sigma 50mm F/1.4 A using the Sigma USB-dock, Sigma Optimization Pro software, and shooting hundreds of test images with various focus micro adjustment settings, it is obvious that there is a serious problem with my lens AF operation. This may not appear as a serious problem for a casual or semi-serious user (lens focuses after all but at a bit wrong point). However, for a critical perfectionist, this is unacceptable. Very similar problem is described in depth at
http://pindelski.org/Photography/2013/01/13/sigma-35mm-f1-4-dg-hsm-a1-for-nikon-part-ii/

Apr 2, 2016permalink

Photography201

Cost aside would you buy the Nikon 58 mm over the Sigma Art 50 mm? I use the D750 as well and am trying to figure out best move first and then worry about cost.
Where did you buy your Sigma lens from?
I understand the only reason to micro adjust is if you open the lens to F 1.4, focus say on a persons nose and it is OOF with the eye being sharp it back focussed
If you do the same locked on to a eye and the nose is sharp.
I have not felt like i needed micro adjustment with the Nikon lenses I have and was trying to clarify how you know you need to do this and by what means do you set up the caemra to figure it out and was told use the widest aperture in manual exposure mode. I am not sure I want to bother with charts and targets etc..

Apr 4, 2016permalink

Lassoni

I think I didn't have AF problems with mine on my D810, much more problems with 85mm f1.8 G. The biggest drawback of sigma tho is its (imo) very heavy weight. I feel if tamron is "close enough" to it, their primes might be better (since they're lighter).

I never shot or held medium format gear, but I got a feeling the sigma might be weight-wise entering in that category :/

I don't think the nikon 58mm is worth it, as it doesn't produce same kind of results wide open.. but maybe it has better bokeh than sigma / nikon's 50 1.4-1.8 G's? It simply lacks the wide open sharpness (I think both 50 G's do too) , so I'm in favor of the new tamron primes

Apr 22, 2016*permalink

cirtapfotos

Finally it was tested on a Quality Camera and Quality Sensor..Nikon D810. I have been using Sigma 50mm Art for a couple of years now. Nothing comes close, except Otus 55..but that is another type of Beast. Tack Sharp and yes it is heavy, but no problem. I am test driving the new Sigma 24-35mm Art in two weeks...can't wait. The Sigma 50mm Art has been a joy to use and no problems with Focus on my D810. I Highly Recommend The Sigma 50mm Art. Beautiful work it performs.

Mar 2, 2016permalink

Holladay

I've been in and out of my local camera store nearly once a week for the past few months trying to decide between the Sigma 1.4 Art and the Canon 1.2L. After A LOT of deliberation, I'm about to buy the Sigma. Not because it's sharper (it is), not because the AF feels a little faster(well maybe just a little), not because it's cheaper (this definetley helps), but because of the overall general aesthetic of the image it produces. It's difficult to explain, but the in-focus area when shot at 1.4 tends to really pop out. More so than the Canon. The bokeh is not as dreamy as the Canon, probably because it's sharper overall, but it's nice.
One of my main concerns though, besides it's weight, is the customer service and quality. I have nothing but good things to say about my local Canon Service Center. Their customer service is amazing. After seeing some people mention some QC problems with the Sigma, I'm feeling kind of nervous about pulling the trigger.

Feb 28, 2016permalink

Alex TT

I finally picked up a copy of the 1.4 art 50mm and after a bit of in-body AF-fine tuning it's laser sharp.
Doing this is highly recommended as the lens needs some adjustment to get it right.
Very satisfied with results now after being a bit frustrated when initially getting the lens.
Big and heavy lens as well as very pricy at a grand but well worth it.
Great images come from big glass and big glass is heavy.

The trade off with size/weight and being pricey is definitely worth the quality you're getting.

Feb 28, 2016permalink

smakogon

Sharp at 1.4. Nice bokeh though not as creamy as with Canon 50 F/1.2L. Much better than other Canon 50mm.

Jan 10, 2016permalink

Wrightphilip

I'm using Sony Alpha. I really impressed with this lens. Overall is perfect!!!

Nov 17, 2015permalink

LarsDaniel

I can fully aggree on the conslusions, except for one thing: It puzzles me that it is regarded as expensive, given how unshamefully good it is. I mean: Next step up would be the Otus.
Anyway, I am deeply awed by it, and it is such a joy to see how Sigma has stepped up their game. (More like a quantum leap, actually.)
And no, I don´t have any close friends at Sigma.

Sep 1, 2015permalink

photominion

IMO, the Sigma is really expensive, because while it's really sharp and fast and everything, it also completely lacks character and the Bokeh is far from great.

The Canon 50/1.2L may be slow and way too expensive and not really sharp wide open, but it has character and produces beautiful oof highlights.

The OTUS is an investment for life and delivers on the whole spectrum. There is absolutely nothing I could find to complain about with this lens.

Oct 1, 2015permalink

smakogon

Sigma is expensive and Canon and OTUS is not?... 1000/2000/4000

Jan 10, 2016permalink

WastingTime

@Photominion. Suspense is killing, please do tell what do you mean by character? In your opinion the 50 1.2 from Canon, despite lacking in every way, is worthy of it's price tag just because of this "Character" thing.
The Otus, on the other hand, is optically perfect lens but 4x more expensive and does not deliver on the full spectrum since it does not have AF.

Jan 12, 2016permalink

victorian squid

On my first few shots, I have to say I wasn't particularly impressed.

I was comparing with my EF 24-70/2.8L II. Center sharpness appeared about the same.

But once I started using it more - and then (especially) fine-tuned with the USB dock this lens positively came alive. There's more to it than just sharpness, which it's certainly got to the very corners. Local contrast is amazing - this thing pulls details out of thin air.

I've loved my Nikkor 50/1.4 AI-S since the late 70's, and nothing could match its creamy bokeh until now. This lens is another winner from Sigma.

Jul 16, 2015permalink

SCKNOWS

Now I can finally get rid of this awful Canon 50 f/1.4. Yesssss

Jul 14, 2015permalink

Adrien S

This being said, there were lots of opportunities to do so even before this lens was created.
I opted for the previous Sigma 50 1.4 EX DG HSM. It was already way better than the Canon.

Sep 27, 2015permalink

FahadSultan

HI,
I want to buy this lens to use it on a D3200 Nikon. Are there going to be any issues with focusing with this lens on this camera and is it a good choice and should I go for it?

Thanks in advance!

Jul 9, 2015permalink

Raphael9999

Hi,
D3200 has a crop factor, so this lens for FF will be a 75mm equivalent. It will certainly work.
If you're looking for a 50mm equivalent you could use their 35mm for full frame.

A $1,000 lens might not usually be paired with a D3200. Nikon and other have qualitative 50mm equiv lens for a portion of the price.

Aug 18, 2015permalink

bowielow

Or 24mm 1.4, basically any Art lens will do the trick. Sigma is actually turning the market upside down, in a good way though. Way to show Nikon and Canon to stop ripping off their customers.

Jan 5, 2016permalink

omegaman1

It appears that the Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM standard lens is a true winner, a very fine lens! I have a Canon digital SLR (Rebel XS), and it seems whether most photographers have and shoot with a Canon, Nikon, or other digital SLR, then this standard lens is definitely the glass to choose, and use!

May 18, 2015permalink

Mr Darma

Sharp, great color, distortionless and exquisitely detailed. The bokeh is decidedly short of dreamy however....

Mar 4, 2015permalink

PhotographyIsLifestyle

does this work with nikon d7100?

Jan 18, 2015permalink

bluevellet

Of course. But it becomes a 75mm equivalent lens because of the crop factor.

Feb 17, 2015permalink

Tad0ms

In love with the new 50mm and 35mm 'art' lenses. only had an issue with one of out of what we've sold. It's good to see Sigma have stepped up their mark a fair bit.

Jan 13, 2015permalink

Hedley7d

This Lens is exceptionnal, the bokeh are so soft and dreamy wow!

Dec 21, 2014permalink

kobiluba

I want it

Oct 25, 2014permalink

armandino

ok, now I want to see a 24/1.4.....

Sep 26, 2014permalink

donmcmahan

Sigma's long standing problem has been quality control and consistency, they could design good lenses but go on to build a rather significant proportion of them that were not quite right.......I hope they have cracked it.

Jul 31, 2014permalink

HowaboutRAW

That problem may have been true some years ago.

But it's not an issue people have reported lately, say after the year 2010. (Excepting of course that all manufactures will have issues.)

Aug 10, 2014permalink

armandino

I love my 2 brand new sigma lenses. I love the image out of them, the feel, and the look. Both needed to be sent out for repair just a few months old. I own Canon glass by buckets, mostly purchased used. Some 10-15 years old. Never had to repair a single lens. Good that Sigma offers a 7 year warranty, otherwise I would not buy even if I love the product.

Sep 26, 2014permalink

Bitpimps

I agree with the QC/QA problem but they do seem to have fixed it. I own a 35mm Art lense, my impressions so far for the last 4 months of ownership has been they have done a very good job on making sure it was a well designed product. I plan to own more sigma glass in the future because of this. (50mm Art, and a 135mm if they ever make a high end version of that)
http://flic.kr/p/pzS1Qo
Recent landscape shot taken w/35mm Art lense. I have been using it for a walking around lense while making children's portraits at family events as well.

Nov 6, 2014*permalink

Marksphoto

Is anybody using a 50mm lens?

Jul 31, 2014permalink

am stram gram

Is anybody *never* using a 50mm lens?

Aug 29, 2014permalink

armandino

actually I do not use it, my most used lenses when not shooting sports:
1) 70-200/2.8
2) 35/1.4
3) 85/1.2
on FF cameras

Sep 26, 2014*permalink

Marksphoto

I don't do photography as a hobby, when I photograph weddings I use 24-70 and 70-200 on different camera bodies.

Changing lenses on a wedding is not something I would risk doing - by the time you change the lens the moment is gone...

Using a 50mm lens for a hobbyist is justifiable cuz you can carry 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, 70mm lenses in your camera bag and take them out when you need them - good for nature on the picnic photography :)

Oct 15, 2014*permalink

SteveGeePhotographee

Have to disagree on that point. As a professional photographer of 25 years.. A good 50mm like this lens is a must! ...Just not for weddings... I do commercial, industrial and investigative photography as well as in the studio 50mm are vital to have in your arsenal.. Especially one as good as the Art lens!

Oct 19, 2014permalink

Bitpimps

I know of at least one reputable pro photographer who uses the 50mm on a crop body for fashion and beauty portraits with excellent results.

Nov 6, 2014permalink

Clint009

Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 vs Sigma 50mm f/1.4

Jul 24, 2014permalink

JSJQ

My Sigma 50mm Art arrived last week. I had been told by Brisbane Australia camera shops that I could not get one until late in 2014. BUT Leederville Cameras in Perth Australia has them and their service is very good.

Am I happy with the lens on a Canon 6D? After all the hype I am a touch disappointed. The lens set at "0" microfocus was alarmingly back focused. Reikan Focal suggested +12 to overcome the problem. This seems a lot to me but the images while sharper are not as I expected. They are nothing like a Zeiss 21 - perhaps not a fair comparison - not quite as good as a well set up Fuji X100s 50mm and, dare I say it, not even as sharp as my Canon 24-105 at 50mm.

I will continue to work at the micro adjustments in the hope of getting something better out of the lens.

So far I am underwhelmed. Good luck to all those who are happy with their purchase. Unless it gets better I think I will stay with Canon and Zeiss lenses.

Jul 21, 2014*permalink

JSJQ

Time to eat humble pie. I spent some time adjusting the lens again. The results are amazing on my Canon 6d. Wonderful bright colour that certainly did credit to Sydney Harbour on a sunny Sunday. Sharp corner to corner at f 5.6. I processed images using DXO but the program made minimal difference to the original RAW photos.

Jul 27, 2014*permalink

DougVann

I am also using this lens on a Canon 6D. It is the second one I have had. The first one was returned under warranty. A couple of times the camera operation froze with this lens installed. This had never happened with any other lens I have. Returned it and the store gave me a replacement. The 2nd one has been perfect. No issues and the photos have been razor sharp. Just amazing. I have done 2 weddings and a retirement dinner shoot and couldn't be happier with the lens performance. I have previously owned the Canon 50mm f1.8, Sigma 50mm f1.4 EX DG HSM and Canon f1.2 L lenses and this one is sharper then all of them.

Nov 9, 2014*permalink

jaadwa

I am using the Sigma 50mm 1.4 Art on a Canon 5d III... had a job at a kids summer camp photographing IDs on a three dimensional backdrop ... the picture were the sharpest I have ever taken with outstanding contrast.... well done Sigma (and Canon) .

Jul 18, 2014permalink

Dougbm_2

OMG not even one decent image with the best lens you have ever reviewed (well maybe there was but I gave up) . Look guys I like the site but come on how about some guest photographers or something! Pretty please. : )

Jul 16, 2014permalink

DarrynM

Thanks for the info - will definitely add this my list of gear to buy for wedding photography :)

Jun 18, 2014permalink

arie

I did my own tests comparing the Zeiss Distagon T* 24mm f/2 and the Sigma, and head to head it was pretty much identical in terms of stellar resolving power with very little CA. I'd have to give the edge to the Sigma, but both were very impressive. The ONLY thing I really miss and wish the Sigma had was a focus hold button. Really miss that. But the Sigma IS all it's cracked up to be, stellar! It's heavy too!

Jun 13, 2014permalink

Kabe Luna

No surprise the Sigma outperforms virtually all other 50/1.4s and even the Canon EF 50mm f1.2L (which isn't awfully sharp wide open and has unattractively nervous bokeh)–my Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art, after a year of continual use, still impresses the hell out of me with its spectacular build quality, sharpness (especially wide open) and superb contrasts. Sigma is on a mission, it seems, and I'm along for the ride.

Jun 12, 2014permalink

milesmute

I have the Sigma 35mm and as of a few days ago the 50mm, love them both. I've also had a Sigma 20mm f/1.8 for years now and although it's a fun lens to use (incredible flares whether you want them or not!) you can see how far Sigma have come. It's as much a tank as the Art lenses (82mm filter thread!) but it's a clown-car in comparison to the Art build quality.

Jul 18, 2014*permalink

pierre1

Blown away by these recent samples! Of course the best ones would have been taken with the D4s.
https://www.flickr.com/groups/2662280@N23/

Jun 12, 2014*permalink

seoga

i like

Jun 8, 2014*permalink

Franz Kerschbaum

I did now a short astrophotography test and I am very happy! http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53811756

Jun 7, 2014permalink

(unknown member)

I do not see anything in the samples to make me buy one, and my old Nikkor will just have to do. It's great to know they can be made, but outside of controlled studio conditions,with no IS either to get that resolution, as there is no weatherproofing at all, the risk that electronically it may die, or be ruined by damp and/or dust tells me that Sigma do not care about buyers.Like most makers these days...

You would need to stop taking pictures if it rained, and now ALL of the modern fast primes we compare it to are useless outside in normal weather conditions. This from a country with a climate like our own and subject to tsunami and volcanic eruptions makes no sense at all.

Weighs three times a Nikon 50mm f1.4 does too

Jun 6, 2014*permalink

HowaboutRAW

When, by most reports, this lens optically outperforms anything but a Zeiss Otus, and you don't see anything special about one particular set of samples, I suggest you look for other samples and/or use a better monitor.

As to weather sealing, well that would be nice, but SLR lenses worked before weather sealing.

If the Nikon 50mm 1.4 has the optical performance you seek, use that Nikon.

Jun 8, 2014permalink

Poss

I’ve been out in the rain with unsealed lens more than once. The truth is you’ll be seeking shelter long before the lens will crap out. I had my unsealed Sigma 35mm gone thru the occasional beer dousing at wedding receptions with no ill effects...

Jun 12, 2014permalink

starwolfy

Nothing beats a leica summilux f1.4 asph.
Cheaper than an Otus, way smaller and way lighter than both Otus and this Sigma lens. The only thing this Sigma has for it is better value per dollar and autofocus. Its a very good lens but I still cannot accept weight a size compromises you have to make to enter dslr world. The biggest joke is when u compare an Othus to the Leica Lux...it looks like a serious joke from size.

Jun 6, 2014permalink

simpleshot

The Sigma trumps the Leica in every category, except size/weight.
The Sigma is way sharper across the entire frame at any aperture, has way less distortion and less vignetting.
For a lot less quality on the Leica, you have to pay more and lose AF.

http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1503/cat/107/date/1336701679

http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1677/cat/30

At least with the Otus, it is sharper than the Sigma on the corners. Perhaps that is worth the additional $3000 (but I myself am not willing to pay that much dollars for the difference in corner sharpness).

Jun 6, 2014*permalink

starwolfy

You reply to me with two charts? Just me laugh.

Jun 6, 2014permalink

HowaboutRAW

starwolfy:

That Leica 50mm f/1.4 costs more, not a lot, than the Zeiss Otus.

Then the lens that beats the Leica 50/1.4? The Leica 50/2.0--costs a bit more than the Otus though.

Jun 7, 2014permalink

starwolfy

Since you love test charts I will prove you with test charts that you are wrong :)

Better sharpness across the entire frame ? LoL
Far less distortion ? LoL
Vigneting ? LoL

Oh and wait...3 times lighter, E46, wayyyy smaller.

Thanks.

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014/06/comparing-rangefinder-and-slr-50mm-lenses-version-0-7

Jun 9, 2014permalink

Under The Sun

Indeed for that price we should expect no less. Makes us all wish that all full frame cameras had lenses the size of Leica glass. Still Sigma is still the more practical purchase for the rest of us.

Jun 14, 2014permalink

solomonshv

summilux and otus are pretty much a full on hobby lenses. while they do edge out the 50mm art in sharpness, the difference is so marginal that you will not notice it if you don't spend an hour examining a picture at 100% crop.

in our day and age i see no reason to even consider a manual focus lens unless you are on a ridiculously tight budget or you prefer to do things the hard way.

if your photography is 100% portrait work, i can see a reason to possibly consider a super sharp manual lens, but otherwise, good luck focusing manually on fast moving subjects...

Jul 20, 2014*permalink

HowaboutRAW

solomonshv:

I've not used this Sigma 50, so can't be sure. But good Leica and Zeiss lenses, besides being sharp, do subtle colour real well.

And that's something that's pretty easy to see with a decent print or raw file and a good display.

So this Sigma looks real promising, but thinking that resolution is the only reason to use say a Leica M is misleading.

Jul 20, 2014permalink

JDThomas

"but otherwise, good luck focusing manually on fast moving subjects..."

I always laugh when i read things like this. I shoot fast moving musicians using a manual focus Summilux all the time. I've also shot sports such as boxing and even sport bike racing (200+mph) using a manual focus lens.

Sorry to break this to you, but it's not luck, it's skill.

Aug 6, 2014permalink

solomonshv

@JDThomas

Sorry to break this to you, but it doesn't take much skill to focus on a motorcycle going at even 250 mph because you are sitting in the stands that are 50+ meters away. from that vantage point you have plenty of time to track them as they go past you. for the most part they are moving in a straight line and taking occasional turns. but they are following a track so there aren't any surprises as to where they are going to be when you hit the shutter button.

want to test your "skills"? try to focus on your subject when you have to take 50+ degree turns at any unpredictable moment in a matter of 3 seconds. like photographing a basketball player maneuvering around the defenders from near the court side. see how well that works out for you. even "cat like" reflexes won't help you much.

Aug 10, 2014permalink

JDThomas

How about professional boxers from ringside about a meter away? You think those guys are predictable? Less than 3 seconds my man. DONE IT. How about BMX and skateboarding? Done that too.

Also just to clarify, I don't sit in the stands when I shoot MotoGP. I'm 15-20 feet away on the infield track.

Seriously dude. Maybe YOU can't hack it, but some of us can.

Aug 10, 2014permalink

Under The Sun

@JDThomas If what you claim is true then you are indeed very skilled. However the point still stands, modern autofocus especially with a high end cameras like the 1DX or the D4s with the Sigma will still outperform your manually focused Summilux regardless how skilled you are.

Aug 10, 2014permalink

JDThomas

I can show you the photos if you want. I'm not just saying it for the hell of it.

The real truth of it is that zone focus will beat AF always, but leaving that out, I'd rather manually focus and get one exceptional image than have my camera autofocus and get 30 mediocre images.

And even if the AF captured a great moment, the satisfaction of catching a great moment against the odds by manual focusing is more fulfilling. I mean don't get me wrong, I use AF when I have to get the shot for the money, but I always love the photos that I work for best.

Aug 11, 2014permalink

Under The Sun

@JDThomas Although I have mingled with a few sports photographers I have yet to meet someone who shoots fast sports action on manual focus though I don't deny that photographers of the past shot iconic sports photography on full manual. So, yes please send me a link, I'm genuinely curious.

However, I remain skeptical that zone focus will beat the modern AF of a camera like the 1DX or D4s - at least if one's criteria is reliability and output. Quality, well, in my opinion having a reliable tracking autofocus means one less thing to worry about for the photographer which mean he/she can focus more on things like composition. However if it is the visceral satisfaction you get from shooting fast action with a manual lens than you are correct.

As you said not everyone can cut it or even want to cut it if given the choice.

Aug 12, 2014permalink

Esstee

leica summilux f1.4 asph doesn't even come close to the Sigma.
In fact, it pales even in comparison with Sony 55/1.8

Jan 4, 2016permalink

Dougbm_2

This is the highest score I remember seeing on this site. Well done Sigma.

Jun 6, 2014permalink

BigGJ

My only complaint about this lens is that it is not readily available.

Jun 4, 2014permalink

solomonshv

i went to B&H to pick one up locally. they had a substantial shipment on release but they were all pre ordered and there were even pre orders that could not be fulfilled.

Jul 20, 2014permalink

Corwess

How in the World can the price be in "CON"???
This glass is CHEAP compared to all PRO Lenses... beats the Canon 1.2L Lens and its like 500$ cheaper.

Zeiss costs 4000 Bucks.. and you dont have AF.. Quality is slightly better but most of you wont notice it anyway. and did i mention the Price of the Sigma?

ONLY!!!! 949$...! get your head straight guys!

Jun 4, 2014permalink

BigGJ

Yes, I agree. People complain about the silliest things. This lens is a bargain. With Zeiss-like quality at one quarter the price, this is a great deal and I'm getting one. I was going to buy the Otus, but decided this is a much better deal with negligible image quality differences.

Jun 4, 2014permalink

(unknown member)

My new SIgma has exceeded all expectations. Build quality and optical quality is amazing, significantly (hands down) better than both my Canon 50mm f1.2L and my Zeiss f1.4 ZE planar, both of which are on sale on craigslist. Sigma has surpassed Canon as a lens builder. Possibly even Zeiss. And this is coming from a Sigma hater!!! To reiterate, the Sigma is sharper wide open than either of those stopped down to any level. It even humiliates my Canon 100mm macro IS L. I find myself in disbelief

Jun 2, 2014*permalink

HowaboutRAW

How does the colour, in your estimation, compare to that from the Zeiss 50 f/1.4?

I realize the Sigma is sharper.

Which Canon DSLR are you using the Sigma on? Do you shoot raw at ISO 3200 and above?

Jun 3, 2014permalink

(unknown member)

The colors are much richer, contrast and micro-contrast is superior and sharpness is otherworldly. The Sigma simply outclasses the other 50s. no small feat.
FYI, I use a Canon 5D series body and a T4i. With the 5D the shallo DOF is spectacular, on the t4i it becomes a supern 80mm portrait lens. unbeatable. I do not use the lens past 800ISO.

Jun 3, 2014permalink

HowaboutRAW

Chris Y:

Thanks.

I'd be interested to see what you think of higher ISO shooting (raw) above ISO 3200, but if that's not what you shoot, I understand why you'd skip that.

Jun 3, 2014permalink

(unknown member)

For one, the 5d doesn't go past 1600 ISO, and I rarely use the t4i past that.

Jun 3, 2014permalink

HowaboutRAW

CY:

I guess I didn't realize you were using the 5D MarkI. I'd forgotten it doesn't go above ISO 3200.

Jun 3, 2014permalink

(unknown member)

Yeah, I'm still using the old 1st Generation 5D and cranking out beautiful photographs. The t4i is also a fun camera to use. It just depends on my mood really. I'd love to get a Canon Mirrorless, but it has to have a viewfinder.

Jun 4, 2014permalink

HowaboutRAW

Chris Yates:

It's a nice body, I just have these higher ISO--low light needs.

I think there are better mirrorless than Canon's mirrorless, and if you're comfortable with manually focusing you can use those Canon lenses, and the Sigma, on various mirrorless bodies. Fuji+Sony+Samsung all have adapters and all have bodies with electronic VFs.

Jun 4, 2014*permalink

Petka

Just shot my first assignment with Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art on Nikon D4: totally amazingly sharp full open. Accurate and fast AF also. It is a keeper! Next I have to play with D800e...

Jun 2, 2014permalink

Franz Kerschbaum

I have it now since a week and tested it a lot on my 5DIII. To make it short: my EF 50/1.2 is on ebay now. To make it a bit longer: great sharpnes and contrast already wide open (for what I want to use it). Focus quite reliable (-2MA at close distances, 0 at infinity, will be corrected via USB dock). Nice handling and it mixes nicely with my EF 85/1.2II from its color rendering... Interesting finding: dpp allows for a DLO correction! Nevertheless I do it with DXO anyway.

Jun 2, 2014permalink

Robin Ducker

Horses for courses as usual. The Sigma is obviously a very fine lens: no question.
However a point of order here: Most DSLR lenses from Canon and Nikon have very low contrast.
I am lucky enough to own a Nikkor 135 F2 DC: to my mind this has THE best bokeh of any 35mm lens. However, it has, in comparison to my MFT lenses, and particularly the 75 1.8 frighteningly low contrast. This is not a small difference: it is massive and its a key reason that Nikon and Canon DSLR's are so lax at CD. CD relies on contrast. So, my point is when are the "big 2" going to get real and start producing lenses that make crap PD systems obsolete?
Anyway well done Sigma.

Jun 2, 2014permalink

Dougbm_2

What?!! Most lenses ???? Doesn't apply to any of my Canon L lenses.

Jul 16, 2014permalink

simpleshot

See:
http://willchaophotography.com/sigma-50mm-f1-4-art-review/

In this review, there is a good comparison with Canon's 50L with regards to bokeh on identical situations.
It looks like the Sigma easily beats the more expensive 50L.

Jun 2, 2014*permalink

Vignes

In the past Sigma Lens seldom get mentioned by Pro's etc but today it's brand that's not only getting recognised but getting good review rank. This Japanese company come a long way. Very patient, great achievement. Only thing is, the price of their fine achievements are going upwards to.

Jun 1, 2014*permalink

gLOWx

You love primes ?
One word : PENTAX
And another word : Limited

After that, you can speak about overpriced Zeiss, Sony, Sigma Tamron, Canon, Nikon, whatever lenses.

May 31, 2014permalink

ambercool

You've already done a comparison? Nice. Send the link please.

May 31, 2014permalink

digilux

http://nikonrumors.com/2013/03/13/dxomark-best-lenses-for-the-nikon-d800-camera.aspx/

May 31, 2014permalink

Andrew Westlake

That link isn't terribly relevant here, as it predates the Sigma 50mm F1.4 Art.

Jun 2, 2014permalink

yoms

Hi!
Can someone explain me something about the 3 shots of the distant clock to point out focus inaccuracy?

As the clock is really distant, I guess focus is set on infinity, right ? Moreover, focusing and exposure is always measured the aperture fully open, that is 1.4. So why is there misfocusing? Infinity is infinity, no ? There's no infinity + a little front focus or back focus.

Thanks for explaining.

May 30, 2014permalink

Andrew Westlake

The focus should be at infinity, but the camera's autofocus system didn't actually set it correctly (it front-focused slightly instead). That's really all there is to it.

May 30, 2014permalink

yoms

Thank you Andy. I understand that. I must have expressed myself badly...
What I meant is that it seems the clock is so far away that it's way beyond the hyperfocal distance (93.1m @50mm f/1.4 on APS-C). So what I don't get is : if the camera front-focused a little, it should still be within the "sharp focus range". No ? Unless the camera front-focused a lot.

Sorry for bothering...

May 30, 2014permalink

Andrew Westlake

So there are two points here. Firstly, it really doesn't take very much movement of the focus ring to blur the image by the amount seen in those shots. If you look at the distance scale, there's a very small angle between infinity and the first marked distance, which is just 3m.

Secondly, depth of field calculations use a concept of 'acceptable sharpness' that's defined by the diameter of the 'circle of confusion'. For APS-C this is normally about 0.02mm, which is a blur circle covering 4 pixels. By these standards all three of those images would be considered to be 'in focus'. This reflects the fact that DOF calculations aren't about looking at 100% crops, but instead viewing prints.

May 30, 2014permalink

yoms

Thanks again ! This really helps.

I wrongly thought that if there was so small an angle between infinity and the 3m marked distance, it was because there was almost no room for change when travelling from 3m to infinity. I understood something like : "Beyond 3m or so, it's (almost) the same. So why bother having a long distance scale in that range, it won't help/improve things".

So I understand that there's obviously a design choice by Sigma to optimize the focus ring travel distance from 1.7 to 3m. Should be the range they expect people to use the lens most and/or where the slightest change has the biggest impact. So it's the range where there's the most part of the focus distance...

Put that way, it makes sense. Ideally the mechanical travel distance should be infinite too as there is but one 100% perfect focus plan...

Thanks again!

May 31, 2014permalink

Boss of Sony

I don't understand. The Sony FE 55mm f1.8 is sharper than this and has more pleasing bokeh.

May 30, 2014permalink

SimonWilder

I've both the Zeiss 55 ZA and the Sigma 50 Art, the Sigma is IMO just a touch sharper, with regards to the out focus rendering I think it all depends on the elements being thrown out of focus, I've not found either the Zeiss or Sigma to be better than the other in every situation so far, I do prefer the rendering from the Zeiss though, seems to give a bit more of a 3D look.

May 30, 2014permalink

beavertown

The sharpest lenses manufacturers from now on are Carl Z and Sigma.

Nikon will come after Canon.

May 30, 2014permalink

HowaboutRAW

Have you used the new Leica 50mm f/2.0?

For APSC mirrorless, Fuji and Samsung both make sharp lenses.

Not every Zeiss is particularly sharp.

May 31, 2014*permalink

RichRMA

OTUS!!!

May 30, 2014permalink

sirharold

Come on Sigma put a 4/3 mount on a few of them. I'm sure you have some left over from the old 50mm F1.4. I still us for portrait work.

May 30, 2014permalink

Andy Crowe

Not much point really is there? The original 4/3 mount is pretty dead these days and adapting a DSLR lens to mirrorless doesn't make sense (it's a waste of space behind the rear element). Really they should start fleshing out their mirrorless lens range.

May 30, 2014permalink

Bill T.

This new lens can almost compete with a 35 year old 55mm f2.8 AIS Nikkor for sharpness and CA! I think I'll keep the 55 and buy a tripod to cover those rare f1.4 moments.

May 30, 2014permalink

simpleshot

The Sigma is sharper than the Nikkor, even if the Sigma is at 1.4 and the Nikkor is at 2.8. When you put the Sigma at 2.8, it trumps the Nkkor big time.

http://slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/sigma50f14a/ff/tloader.htm
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/nikon55f28ais/ff/tloader.htm

May 30, 2014permalink

ageha

The Nikkor isn't very sharp for an f/2.8 prime to begin with.

May 30, 2014permalink

Krich13

Yes, Nikkor 55/2.8 is an extremely sharp lens. I compared it to Sony FE 55/1.8 on Sony A7 -- they are about equal optically at normal shooting distances. Both at f/2.8 -- FE 55 is a tiny bit sharper in the center has lower lateral CA and nicer bokeh, but the Nikkor has significantly lower longitudinal CA (much harder to get rid of in post). At close focusing distances, the Nikkor (being a macro lens) obviously just spanks the FE Zeiss.
As for the SLRgear report -- this is not the only strange result in their site. Micro Nikkor 55/2.8 is one of the sharpest lenses ever made (and I used Canon 100/2.8 IS, Sigma 70/2.8 macro), its sharpness is "beyond outstanding" for macro applications: http://coinimaging.com/nikon_55microais.html

Having said that, Sigma 50 is not a bad value at all (if you are willing to handle the bulk and weight): after all, it is full two stops faster! Every stop at least doubles the price. Plus it has AF which the Nikkor does not.

May 30, 2014permalink

Latest sample galleries

Nikon Coolpix P1000 sample gallery

Sony 24mm F1.4 GM sample gallery

Canon RF 50mm F1.2L USM sample gallery

Fujifilm X-T3 sample gallery

See more galleries »

Latest in-depth reviews

Review: Peak Design Everyday Sling 10L, a solid but pricey pack

The Everyday Sling might just be the perfect pack for not carrying too much gear, combining comfort with Peak Design's signature modern style.

When the Fujifilm X-T2 arrived, it was more than just a modest upgrade to the already impressive X-T1. While the new X-T3 hasn't changed the overall design of the camera, this model is way more than an upgrade; rather, it's a quantum leap.

The Movie Maker is a compact, motorized slider designed for phones, action cams and small mirrorless cameras. We think it's a fun little kit and a good value proposition for the cost, provided you can work around a few of its weak points.

Nikon's Z7 is the first camera to use the all-new Z-mount, the company's first new full-frame mount since 1959. We've put together our first impressions based on quality shooting time with a pre-production camera - check out what we've found.

Panasonic DC-LX100 II First Impressions Review

We got some hands-on time with a pre-production LX100 II to get a better feel for the improvements Panasonic's brought to the table. Here's a rundown of what's new – and what we think.

Latest buying guides

The instant camera market is heating up, and with four formats and 15+ cameras to choose from, we felt it was high time to examine them all and pick our favorite.

Buying Guide: The best waterproof cameras

Whether you're hitting the beach in the Northern Hemisphere or the ski slopes in the Southern, a rugged compact camera makes a great companion. In this buying guide we've taken a look at seven current models and chosen our favorites.

Buying Guide: The best cameras for parents

What's the best camera for a parent? The best cameras for shooting kids and family must have fast autofocus, good low-light image quality and great video. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for parents, and recommended the best.

Buying Guide: The best cameras for landscapes

What's the best camera for shooting landscapes? High resolution, weather-sealed bodies and wide dynamic range are all important. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting landscapes, and recommended the best.

Buying Guide: The best cameras over $2000

What’s the best camera costing over $2000? The best high-end camera costing more than $2000 should have plenty of resolution, exceptional build quality, good 4K video capture and top-notch autofocus for advanced and professional users. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing over $2000 and recommended the best.

Check out more buying guides »


Premium prime? Nikon AF-S Nikkor 58mm f/1.4G in-depth review Dec 30, 2013	Need the speed? Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM in-depth review Sep 2, 2013	Sigma announces 24-35mm F2 DG HSM Art for full frame cameras Jun 19, 2015	Canon EOS M6 Review May 16, 2017

The best 50 yet? Our Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM in-depth review

Comments

You may also like

More about gear in this article

Latest sample galleries

Latest in-depth reviews

Latest buying guides


_ERN9064 by ernesto juarez from Shoot yourself ! (with your camera)	walkersons fields by George Veltchev from -Waiting for Autumn- (in Full Colours Only)