Comparison of: Zeiss Otus, Sigma 50 Art, Nikkor 58G, Nikkor 50/1.4G, Nikkor 50/1.8G

Started Aug 10, 2014 | Discussions thread
coudet Veteran Member • Posts: 4,059
Re: Couple questions - nice effort, but the testing may mislead some as it stands

Stacey_K wrote:

Like I said, for many people the sigma is probably a better choice. I really don't believe many people understand this lens. They look at lenstip, DXO or other resolution tests zoomed in at 100% and laugh (as the OP did when he wrote this article). Or they compare the far background bokeh on a scene with a fairly smooth background and proclaim "There is no difference!".

Bingo. If you got 58 and the old 50/1.4 to have exactly same bokeh, you probably did something wrong. It really is an easy scene and it doesn't show differences. And there are differences. But hey, as I said, there's no review site that does a good job with bokeh testing.

I don't regret buying the 58 over the sigma.

I quite like the bokeh of the 58mm. I've looked at a lot of samples (but still not enough) and overall it's quite pleasing. More so, for me, than either Sigma 50/1.4, or say, Canon 50/1.2 etc.

Where Nikon don't help themselves is steep price; and also they got overexcited with their press material, since they claim high resolution at widest apertures and also lens being well corrected for coma.

Let's do a quick summary. In the wonderful world of fast normals, there are Zeiss 55/1.4 and Leica 50/1.4 and then there's everything else. For the F-mount, yesterday we were stuck with the 50/1.4 G and the old Sigma. We got a much better choice of lenses today. Life is good.

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