Oshkosh
Senior Member
I don't get the focusing problem too.
Quite frankly, once you get hold of Sigma, you'll love it to bits.
Here's one of mine - Titled: Flower in a bottle (taken with Sigma 50mm f1.4)
Nikon AFS 50mm f1.4 or Sigma 50mm f1.4
- Thread starter amachi
- Start date
- Status
I don't get the focusing problem too.
Quite frankly, once you get hold of Sigma, you'll love it to bits.
Here's one of mine - Titled: Flower in a bottle (taken with Sigma 50mm f1.4)
i owned the 50mm/1.4D and it has served me very well.
Recently i was looking for another one and i was choosing between the AFS 50/1.4G and the Sigma 50/1.4
Tried both, went for the Sigma. Hands down.
Only thing to take note is this issue of focusing accuracy, which was discussed to death.
So if you want to get it, 2 recommendations
(1) REALLY try the focus. Dont focus on things like words on boxes, which will be sharp anyway unless the focus is way out. Focus on real subjects that you normally shoot. For the work i do, i shoot people. So i always test on real people, focus on their eyes from several angles. For cameras with better LCDs like d3, d700, d300 etc, you can spot accuracy from the LCD alone. WHen you get the focus right, the image will pop...razor sharp coming out of creamy bokeh (provided you shoot in lighting with reasonable contrast. Normal shop lighting will be sufficient for this lens.)
(2) try several shops unless you get a good one without compromise. Personally i will not try to rely on the camera's AF finetune function. Of course you can still send to Sigma for a free calibration.
SOme people will take the Nikon for reliability (because image quality wise, no reason not to choose the sigma) over the uncertainty of the Sigma. For me personally, I am willing to go through the trouble, because this lens is really really worth it.
I went through a bit of trouble with the 30mm/1.4 last time. But i loved that lens to bits. Now that the full frame version is out, it is a no brainer to me. And this lens has retained the magic, and perhaps better than its smaller brother. And i just dont like the nikon's bokeh. It is too harsh and distracting, and the elements dont melt together like the sigma. I am talking in f1.4 terms....so it is relative.
things like weight and size are factors not important to me, though i like the heft of the sigma. 77mm filter will be more expensive.
I look forward to using this lens and the 85/1.4 on 2 bodies for my next wedding. They look good together. A lot of glass a lot of magic
Recently i was looking for another one and i was choosing between the AFS 50/1.4G and the Sigma 50/1.4
Tried both, went for the Sigma. Hands down.
Only thing to take note is this issue of focusing accuracy, which was discussed to death.
So if you want to get it, 2 recommendations
(1) REALLY try the focus. Dont focus on things like words on boxes, which will be sharp anyway unless the focus is way out. Focus on real subjects that you normally shoot. For the work i do, i shoot people. So i always test on real people, focus on their eyes from several angles. For cameras with better LCDs like d3, d700, d300 etc, you can spot accuracy from the LCD alone. WHen you get the focus right, the image will pop...razor sharp coming out of creamy bokeh (provided you shoot in lighting with reasonable contrast. Normal shop lighting will be sufficient for this lens.)
(2) try several shops unless you get a good one without compromise. Personally i will not try to rely on the camera's AF finetune function. Of course you can still send to Sigma for a free calibration.
SOme people will take the Nikon for reliability (because image quality wise, no reason not to choose the sigma) over the uncertainty of the Sigma. For me personally, I am willing to go through the trouble, because this lens is really really worth it.
I went through a bit of trouble with the 30mm/1.4 last time. But i loved that lens to bits. Now that the full frame version is out, it is a no brainer to me. And this lens has retained the magic, and perhaps better than its smaller brother. And i just dont like the nikon's bokeh. It is too harsh and distracting, and the elements dont melt together like the sigma. I am talking in f1.4 terms....so it is relative.
things like weight and size are factors not important to me, though i like the heft of the sigma. 77mm filter will be more expensive.
I look forward to using this lens and the 85/1.4 on 2 bodies for my next wedding. They look good together. A lot of glass a lot of magic
noelmac
Member
i owned the 50mm/1.4D and it has served me very well.
Recently i was looking for another one and i was choosing between the AFS 50/1.4G and the Sigma 50/1.4
Tried both, went for the Sigma. Hands down.
Only thing to take note is this issue of focusing accuracy, which was discussed to death.
So if you want to get it, 2 recommendations
(1) REALLY try the focus. Dont focus on things like words on boxes, which will be sharp anyway unless the focus is way out. Focus on real subjects that you normally shoot. For the work i do, i shoot people. So i always test on real people, focus on their eyes from several angles. For cameras with better LCDs like d3, d700, d300 etc, you can spot accuracy from the LCD alone. WHen you get the focus right, the image will pop...razor sharp coming out of creamy bokeh (provided you shoot in lighting with reasonable contrast. Normal shop lighting will be sufficient for this lens.)
(2) try several shops unless you get a good one without compromise. Personally i will not try to rely on the camera's AF finetune function. Of course you can still send to Sigma for a free calibration.
SOme people will take the Nikon for reliability (because image quality wise, no reason not to choose the sigma) over the uncertainty of the Sigma. For me personally, I am willing to go through the trouble, because this lens is really really worth it.
I went through a bit of trouble with the 30mm/1.4 last time. But i loved that lens to bits. Now that the full frame version is out, it is a no brainer to me. And this lens has retained the magic, and perhaps better than its smaller brother. And i just dont like the nikon's bokeh. It is too harsh and distracting, and the elements dont melt together like the sigma. I am talking in f1.4 terms....so it is relative.
things like weight and size are factors not important to me, though i like the heft of the sigma. 77mm filter will be more expensive.
I look forward to using this lens and the 85/1.4 on 2 bodies for my next wedding. They look good together. A lot of glass a lot of magic
well said! hopefully will get my sharp copy by tomorrow!
Grandmama is right......it definitely depends on what you shoot too, but if it were a straight fight between the new Nikon AFS 50mm and the Sigma, I'd take the Sigma anyday of the week and twice on Sundays.
The Nikon was very disappointing for me: I tried so many copies, and they all had terrible bokeh with badly smeared background even stopped down. It's sharp but its sharpness is harsh, and the bokeh is harsh too. I certainly would NEVER use it for portraits because it is not good at skin tones, and if I wanted a general purpose 50mm lens, I'd shell out for the Zeiss Makro 50mm F2 instead.
But I shoot mostly people between the focal lengths of 50-135, and the Sigma is wonderful for that, and it is darn good as a general purpose lens too. The first few shots I took with the lens were at home, and my wife was the subject, and let's just say that the only times I have been so impressed with a portrait lens off the bat like that were with Nikon's own 85 1.4 and 105 DC. And the Sigma 50 is NOT a dedicated portrait lens even!
If it were a general purpose/walkabout 50mm lens I wanted, I'd be hard pressed to choose between the Zeiss Makro F2 and the Sigma. But I shoot people mostly, even in street photography, and for that, it's not a contest, so I actually sold my Zeiss and got the Sigma instead. The Zeiss is a cold lens, the Sigma has a warmth and a rendering that's unique, and it's not something that can be replicated merely by changing your auto white balance settings.
Like Grandmama said, do get a good copy, but that goes for any lens purchase these days, even the new Nikon ones (did someone say the 35 1.8, the 50 1.4 and the 10-24???) since they are no longer exclusively made in Japan anymore and have a plasticky feel to them in much greater capacity than previous generations of Nikon lenses. I tested several Sigmas before I settled on one, but I do the same for ALL lenses, regardless of manufacturer. QC control ain't what it used to be, not even for Nikon.
Btw, the Sigma overexposes by about 1-2 stops depending on the lens, so you'll have to factor in exposure compensation when you shoot, but it is a very small price to pay It's the first 50mm lens I would use to shoot a wedding.
The Nikon was very disappointing for me: I tried so many copies, and they all had terrible bokeh with badly smeared background even stopped down. It's sharp but its sharpness is harsh, and the bokeh is harsh too. I certainly would NEVER use it for portraits because it is not good at skin tones, and if I wanted a general purpose 50mm lens, I'd shell out for the Zeiss Makro 50mm F2 instead.
But I shoot mostly people between the focal lengths of 50-135, and the Sigma is wonderful for that, and it is darn good as a general purpose lens too. The first few shots I took with the lens were at home, and my wife was the subject, and let's just say that the only times I have been so impressed with a portrait lens off the bat like that were with Nikon's own 85 1.4 and 105 DC. And the Sigma 50 is NOT a dedicated portrait lens even!
If it were a general purpose/walkabout 50mm lens I wanted, I'd be hard pressed to choose between the Zeiss Makro F2 and the Sigma. But I shoot people mostly, even in street photography, and for that, it's not a contest, so I actually sold my Zeiss and got the Sigma instead. The Zeiss is a cold lens, the Sigma has a warmth and a rendering that's unique, and it's not something that can be replicated merely by changing your auto white balance settings.
Like Grandmama said, do get a good copy, but that goes for any lens purchase these days, even the new Nikon ones (did someone say the 35 1.8, the 50 1.4 and the 10-24???) since they are no longer exclusively made in Japan anymore and have a plasticky feel to them in much greater capacity than previous generations of Nikon lenses. I tested several Sigmas before I settled on one, but I do the same for ALL lenses, regardless of manufacturer. QC control ain't what it used to be, not even for Nikon.
Btw, the Sigma overexposes by about 1-2 stops depending on the lens, so you'll have to factor in exposure compensation when you shoot, but it is a very small price to pay
It's the first 50mm lens I would use to shoot a wedding.
TheChef
Senior Member
Grandmama is right......it definitely depends on what you shoot too, but if it were a straight fight between the new Nikon AFS 50mm and the Sigma, I'd take the Sigma anyday of the week and twice on Sundays.
The Nikon was very disappointing for me: I tried so many copies, and they all had terrible bokeh with badly smeared background even stopped down. It's sharp but its sharpness is harsh, and the bokeh is harsh too. I certainly would NEVER use it for portraits because it is not good at skin tones, and if I wanted a general purpose 50mm lens, I'd shell out for the Zeiss Makro 50mm F2 instead.
But I shoot mostly people between the focal lengths of 50-135, and the Sigma is wonderful for that, and it is darn good as a general purpose lens too. The first few shots I took with the lens were at home, and my wife was the subject, and let's just say that the only times I have been so impressed with a portrait lens off the bat like that were with Nikon's own 85 1.4 and 105 DC. And the Sigma 50 is NOT a dedicated portrait lens even!
If it were a general purpose/walkabout 50mm lens I wanted, I'd be hard pressed to choose between the Zeiss Makro F2 and the Sigma. But I shoot people mostly, even in street photography, and for that, it's not a contest, so I actually sold my Zeiss and got the Sigma instead. The Zeiss is a cold lens, the Sigma has a warmth and a rendering that's unique, and it's not something that can be replicated merely by changing your auto white balance settings.
Like Grandmama said, do get a good copy, but that goes for any lens purchase these days, even the new Nikon ones (did someone say the 35 1.8, the 50 1.4 and the 10-24???) since they are no longer exclusively made in Japan anymore and have a plasticky feel to them in much greater capacity than previous generations of Nikon lenses. I tested several Sigmas before I settled on one, but I do the same for ALL lenses, regardless of manufacturer. QC control ain't what it used to be, not even for Nikon.
Btw, the Sigma overexposes by about 1-2 stops depending on the lens, so you'll have to factor in exposure compensation when you shoot, but it is a very small price to pay
Well said. :thumbsup:
Congratulations. Enjoy the lens. You will not regret it. It is worth every hard earned cent.
Extremely nice for portraits.
Last edited:
nikkkon
New Member
Me very new to camera and accidentally bought Sigma 50 mm but I must say that I am very impressed by the image
http://www.flickr.com/photos/north5tar/3881888028/in/pool-664291@N24
http://www.flickr.com/photos/north5tar/3881888028/in/pool-664291@N24
Last edited:
My last lens purchased was during Nikon AI era and I'm surprised to read about performance & even bokeh difference between units within same model.
Will the shops allow us to open up unit after unit to try? Are these QA issues so severe that they're even visible on the cameras LCD?
Will the shops allow us to open up unit after unit to try? Are these QA issues so severe that they're even visible on the cameras LCD?
in any case,
i am having 2 of them. both brand new pieces
one is serial no. #10033165 from MS Colour, $870 receipt date 31st August 2009
the other is serial no. #10033565 from Cathay, $875 receipt date 3rd Sept 2009
i decided to buy 2 of them, and mind you, they were both tested and in focus. (i use 2 D700s)
Have decided to keep the newer piece (10033565)
so interested people can contact me for the other piece bought on 31st August 2009
i am willing to let go at $800. You can come over and test it for yourself. Both are good pieces, just that I am very kiasu. ( I making a loss of $70 over 4 days of hardly usage)
can contact me 92736992 if interested.
i am having 2 of them. both brand new pieces
one is serial no. #10033165 from MS Colour, $870 receipt date 31st August 2009
the other is serial no. #10033565 from Cathay, $875 receipt date 3rd Sept 2009
i decided to buy 2 of them, and mind you, they were both tested and in focus. (i use 2 D700s)
Have decided to keep the newer piece (10033565)
so interested people can contact me for the other piece bought on 31st August 2009
i am willing to let go at $800. You can come over and test it for yourself. Both are good pieces, just that I am very kiasu. ( I making a loss of $70 over 4 days of hardly usage)
can contact me 92736992 if interested.
Bought Sigma from grandmama.. Great guy, great lens 
Just tried taking pictures using it, so far it's really good. I am enjoying this lens a lot
Regarding focusing issue, it's not much of concerns really. No problem focusing in distance too. Overall, very happy with this lens. Will post some pics later on hehe.
Just tried taking pictures using it, so far it's really good. I am enjoying this lens a lot
Regarding focusing issue, it's not much of concerns really. No problem focusing in distance too. Overall, very happy with this lens. Will post some pics later on hehe.
Looks like this is another great lens by sigma other then the 30mm F1.4 brother. I have the same result when comparing the 30mm F1.4 to the nikon 50mm AFD F1.4 at F1.4... i know they are not in the same focal length but at F1.4 the sigma is so much sharper, the bokeh is very creamy and the color is simply delicous. Yes the sigma overexpose by +1 in my camera but this isnt any problem at all.
I own Nikon 50/1.4 AF-S
this lens is not really sharp at F1.4 - F1.8
starting at F2 the sharpness is getting better.
the AF Speed?? VERY SLOWWWWW
here is an example from this lens
taken with D3X
Not a suprise... the AFS is even slower then the AFD version. Many ppl still thinks that lens with built in motor are faster..:bsmilie:
Depends on how you define blurry.. ;p
higher end body has motor with very strong torque, slightly noisy but it is fast!
I shot this handheld at f1.4. Lots depend on yr handheld technique and the the shutter speed
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5160112&postcount=634
Hm, decided to send my lens to be calibrated by Sigma. Came back, still front focussing - -"!!
Want to bring it back again but the lady told me the technician is on leave. Only available next week, sigh. I guess I have to use AF Fine Tune on my camera first until next week.
The sad part is, I specifically told the lady to make sure it's calibrated perfectly as I am planning to use it on this coming weekend. And she told me, no worries, that's what the calibration for, we'll make sure everything comes good
Want to bring it back again but the lady told me the technician is on leave. Only available next week, sigh. I guess I have to use AF Fine Tune on my camera first until next week.
The sad part is, I specifically told the lady to make sure it's calibrated perfectly as I am planning to use it on this coming weekend. And she told me, no worries, that's what the calibration for, we'll make sure everything comes good
- Status
Similar threads
