Sigma 50mm f1.4 ART

Started Jan 6, 2014 | Discussions thread
bogrod Forum Member • Posts: 58
Re: Sigma 50mm f1.4 ART
1

anotherMike wrote:

Yea, you brought up a good point too: I think I personally, while still placing a high value on sharpness (particularly for lenses I use for landscape), I tend to look at contrast performance and other parameters as well, and as I've aged and used the 800E more, I definitely have recognized that no lens is perfect for the most part and instead have begun to "tune" the kit more for lenses that match the task well (and that includes sharpness), usually because of distance to subject, and not rely on just "the sharpest lens".

However, I will say, in defense of mister Bowman I was responding to, I totally understand the frustration many feel towards Nikon. I'm beyond frustrated in how slowly they've come out with new lens designs even though I understand some (or most of it) may be related to after effects from the natural disasters in the past few years. I'm frustrated they don't have a really great 50mm option that works at landscape with N coating and while I appreciate Sato's lens, I would have liked a better "generalist" 50. I'm frustrated that I had to go to Sigma for the best 35mm option, and I'm frustrated I had to go to Zeiss for 21 and 135mm options. I've been a Nikon glass fan for 37 years, so it's maddening in some ways to see how much money I've NOT spent with Nikon because they don't have what I currently need. So while I totally appreciate the 58/1.4, I do have to question whether the time spent on it (and the Nikon DF body) were the best thing in the grander scheme of things. But as a Nikon user of all those years, I know there are times Nikon goes into "pet project" mode and it's part of the deal.

But overall iin this high rez era, one has to look at lens performance at all distances, considering field curvature, contrast, microcontrast, flare resistance and even bokeh, as opposed to just which lens scores the most on a test chart report.

-m

I can understand it from a perspective of Nikon not really releasing a great 50 for the digital age, as I've heard a lot of negative things about the most recent 50 f/1.4. And, I would absolutely agree that the 58 is not for landscapes. And I would also agree that the 58 is not for everyone. What I do defend are the pictoral results from the new 58. What I do defend are people who seem to think that the lens is essentially useless for photography because it doesn't hit so and so numbers on an MTF chart.  I don't know if Nikon has released a lens within the 50-60mm range that produces images that have as pleasing of a look to them as the new 58. Perhaps the only one that I would include would be the old Noct - but, then again, the 58 is essentially equal or better to it in virtually every category (max aperture aside).

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow