50mm f1.4 for Nikon: Nikon or Sigma?

AnnaV

AnnaV

Suspended / Banned
Messages
473
Edit My Images
Yes
Anyone have any thoughts? I want a 50mm prime for Xmas and it's between these two. I have a D40 so the f1.8 won't AF, and I quite want a f1.4 anyway :D

I have heard that the Sigma is better wide open :shrug:
 
Had the same dilema..... then bought the Nikon 35mm 1.8, brilliant lens.

Know that doesn't help you though, sorry
 
From what I read both are great lenses :) Just go for the one you fancy the most :thumbs:
 
dan_yorkshire said:
Had the same dilema..... then bought the Nikon 35mm 1.8, brilliant lens.

Know that doesn't help you though, sorry
Click to expand...

No it doesn't :lol:


I wonder if it is worth me getting that too, would be 50mm equiv on cropped sensor, not that I have any idea what an uncropped sensor looks like, being too young in my photography experience for film (and too poor for full frame digi). I did have a Poloroid when I was a student though :naughty:
 
Anna

I bought a D40 with kit 18-55 AF-S some weeks ago - having finally moved from film with a Canon A1 after 30years - ah., I envy you your youth........:D

anyway have you read any reviews by Ken Rockwell ? brilliant !!

he has 4 on the D40 plus all the DX lens

on the strength of his reviews I bought a 55-200 AF-S VR
and now a 35 1.8 AF-S..."here"

quote "The 35mm f/1.8 DX ........., does auto-focus perfectly with every Nikon, especially the D40,"

cheers

if you have the kit lens - I would go for the 35mm rather than the 50mm
 
We had this dilemma when we wanted to get some 50mm f/1.4 lenses. From the reviews I've read, I gather that the Sigma is the better performer when it's wide open, but the Nikon is better stopped down. Personally I thought wide-open performance was more important, so I went with the Sigma. And I'm glad that I did. It's a decent lens, good build quality, and it's physically impressive too.
 
Have the 1.4AFS on my d300 and love this lens, great IQ and quick to focus. I though the 1.8 was good but this is great!!! At times 50mm can seem a bit long and I wish for 35mm, but most of the time it is fine, and think if I had the 35mm I would be thinking I need longer!
 
I've got the Nikon 50m f/1.4 and it's a great lens - I love it. I also have the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 and I would say the 30mm is a more useful focal length on a DX camera such as the D40.
 
StewartR said:
We had this dilemma when we wanted to get some 50mm f/1.4 lenses. From the reviews I've read, I gather that the Sigma is the better performer when it's wide open, but the Nikon is better stopped down. Personally I thought wide-open performance was more important, so I went with the Sigma. And I'm glad that I did. It's a decent lens, good build quality, and it's physically impressive too.
Click to expand...

Thanks, just looked at your website, really good, I think I will def be a future customer :D

Also the point you make on there is a good one, you generally don't use a f1.4 prime lens stopped down at f8 :D

OK, think I will go and try out the 35mm too...
 
From the limited use of the 1.4 AFS I have had....a couple of hours before it got wrapped and put under the tree.....it is an amazing lens....there is 100GBP difference in the two too!
 
Anna - Nikon is Nikon! It's hard to beat. I have the 50mm Nikkor af-s f/1.4 - and it's fab - don't settle for anything less! Nikon often costs more for a reason!
 
awp said:
Anna - Nikon is Nikon! It's hard to beat. I have the 50mm Nikkor af-s f/1.4 - and it's fab - don't settle for anything less! Nikon often costs more for a reason!
Click to expand...

In this case the Sigma is £100 more ;)
 
or is it?

I tried both and went for the sigma. Lovely lens it is too:)
 
There's also the sigma 30 1.4 gets a lot of favourable reviews.

What do you want to use it for?
 
AnnaV said:
Also the point you make on there is a good one, you generally don't use a f1.4 prime lens stopped down at f8 :D
Click to expand...
Well, you might. One often-overlooked advantage of fast lenses is a lovely bright viewfinder, whatever aperture you're using. But if that were your motivation then you might as well use a 50mm f/1.8, which is probably just as good at f/8 and loads cheaper.
 
Go for the Nikon - it's a great lens and can be picked up around £230 (or less) secondhand - new price seems to be around £280 ATM.

It's on my D700 95% of the time and is a very liberating lens to use - both in low light and compositionally :clap:
 
awp said:
Anna - Nikon is Nikon! It's hard to beat. I have the 50mm Nikkor af-s f/1.4 - and it's fab - don't settle for anything less! Nikon often costs more for a reason!
Click to expand...

AWP - have you actually used the Sigma? Firstly it's the more expensive lens. It has faster AF than the Nikon (but not by much, this is info from people who have tested both) and from what I can see has better bokeh.

Now I haven't used the Nikon 50/1.4 AF-S, I have the Sigma and I love it. I wouldn't trade it for the Nikon, no way.

By all accounts the Nikon is sharper in the corners but the Sigma in the center when wide open, which is where you want to use it right, not at f/8. So it depends on what you want to use it for? I bought mine for portraits and I cannot fault it. I'm sure the OP would be happy with either.

Here are some reviews:
http://www.bjp-online.com/public/showPage.html?page=837772 (Sigma)
http://www.bjp-online.com/public/showPage.html?page=836697 (Nikon)

Make you own mind up.
 
Lardinio said:
AWP - have you actually used the Sigma? Firstly it's the more expensive lens. It has faster AF than the Nikon (but not by much, this is info from people who have tested both) and from what I can see has better bokeh.

Now I haven't used the Nikon 50/1.4 AF-S, I have the Sigma and I love it. I wouldn't trade it for the Nikon, no way.
Click to expand...

I used a number of Sigmas over years on my Nikon (and still using them) and whilst they are great value for money, have I had a choice and enough funds I'd go for Nikon every day. The reason is not any of those you stated - Nikon and Sigma both have different glass, different coatings etc and the lenses essentially produce different feel to the photos. Of course you can correct it to some degree later in PP but that is not the point. To my eye, Nikon lenses produce richer colours and more contrasty photos. They just look better, more natural.

Edit: of course there are rare exceptions from that (notably some older MF Sigma lenses).
 
AnnaV said:
No it doesn't :lol:


I wonder if it is worth me getting that too, would be 50mm equiv on cropped sensor, not that I have any idea what an uncropped sensor looks like, being too young in my photography experience for film (and too poor for full frame digi). I did have a Poloroid when I was a student though :naughty:
Click to expand...

I assume you have the 18-55 kit lens at the mo? I would suggest setting it to 50mm and keeping it there for a while, then using the camera for a few days. I predict you'll find it too long for most things... as I never tire of saying, a 50mm on a crop sensor is 75mm full-frame equivalent, meaning a short tele length. Bit short for portraits, a bit long for everything else. Not bad for street work and gigs, but too long for indoors. 35mm however can be very useful for all sorts of things - it's a very versatile focal length.

I have both 35mm and 50mm - the 35mm is used about 80% of the time, and the 50mm less than 1% of the time. I feel the natural habitat for the 50mm f/1.4 AF-S is the full-frame cameras, as jimbo_wa pointed out.

My desert island lens would be the 35mm, no question. I think this should be top of your shopping list.

Example of depth of focus, 35mm AF-S @ f/1.8:

3935010061_8b890e4ce3.jpg
 
I've got the Sigma 30 1.4 and like it a lot, prefer the 50 1.8 though and that's taking into account the crop factor too. Am buying a 1.4 50 today and was just about to click on the buy button for the Nikon until I read this thread, now I may have to look at the Sigma as well :bonk:
 
I have the Nikon but borrowed a Sigma for half an hour, and on that flimsy test would say it had the edge over the Nikon - brokeh especially. Didn't notice much difference though.

Given the choice again, I'd take the Sigma, but not sure I'd pay an extra £100 for it. If the difference was £20-£30 I'd probably go for it.
 
Canon man here. I have not used the Nikon version, but I did compare both the Sigma & Canion EF-S f/1.4's last weekend in Jacobs. The Sigma is built like a tank and weighs twice as much as the Canon lens. Focus speeds were equal (fast) and so was accuracy. From the few test pictures I shot on a 7D, the Sigma clearly outperformed the Canon wide open until about f/2.8 where I could not tell them apart (I was using the shops 7D so could only review sharpnes on the LCD). The Sigma also comes supplied with a hood and a very robust pouch wheras the Canon (and possibly Nikon) does not.

As Canon & Nikon tend to create very similar performing 50mm primes, I think my Canon vs Sigma comparisson may be valid.

I am now hoping Santa will bring me the Sigma. I told the wife to ask him.
 
Orville said:
As Canon & Nikon tend to create very similar performing 50mm primes, I think my Canon vs Sigma comparisson may be valid.
Click to expand...

Not really to be honest - the Canon 50/1.4 is pretty ropey until past f2 and suffers from a lot of halation wide open. It's a really dreamy look. The Nikkor is good at f1.4 and biting at f1.6 on.

I tried the Sigma and the copy I had was an absolute lemon - just awful and clearly a duffer. As my luck with Sigmas means I've never had a decent lens from them, that was the last one I'll buy.

In the meantime the Nikon has performed perfectly since day 1 and was £100 less. Like this:


4171798575_8e5716b680_o.jpg


In your light I learn how to love.
In your beauty, how to make poems.

You dance inside my chest,
where no one sees you,

but sometimes I do,
and that sight becomes this art.​
 
DP Review test and resolution sesults.
Nikon 50mm F/1.4
Canon 50mm F/1.4
Sigma 50mm F/1.4

The Nikon is indeed better than the Canon wide open, but the Sigma easily beats both @ f/1.4 according DPR studio tests. The Nikon catches up at f/2-f/2.2 and is easily best past f/4, but most people buy a fast lens to use wide open, or close to wide open. I guess if you get a good Sigma, it's really really good, but Nikon may be the safest option.

edit:
It seems that I incorrectly posted the stats for the old Nikon AF 50mm. The newer AF-S 50mm does a much better job against the Sigma wide open.
Nikon AF-S 50mm F/1.4
 
Orville said:
DP Review test and resolution sesults.
Nikon 50mm F/1.4


edit:
It seems that I incorrectly posted the stats for the old Nikon AF 50mm. The newer AF-S 50mm does a much better job against the Sigma wide open.
Nikon AF-S 50mm F/1.4
Click to expand...

Their tests are a bit ropey - I am not sure whether they accounted for sample variation. I had mentioned this already a few times here on TP, Nikon 50 f/1.4 AFD does seem to have some sample variation (those made in China mostly) where it manifests itself as back/front focusing slightly. It is only ever so slightly so with the lens wide open it ends up looking like slightly soft. I went through a few samples until I found one that was perfect - sharp as a razor and resolves a lot of details. My lens at f/1.4 certainly makes a lot sharper photos than DPReview example shot of brick wall with that lens.
 
Radiohead said:
In the meantime the Nikon has performed perfectly since day 1 and was £100 less. Like this:


4171798575_8e5716b680_o.jpg

​
Click to expand...


Just as I was starting to get over my obsession with full frame goodness, you go and post that up :D Cracking shot :thumbs:​
 
See I think I do want a 50mm, I already have a 50-150mm f2.8 which is fab, and I really do like the 50mm having thought about it properly. I do seem to be clustering at that focal length, but portraits are my thing!

It is interesting to see that the majority of people who have compared the two have gone for the Sigma.
 
I sold my 50mm and bought a 35mm f/1.8, I find 50mm a quite restrictive focal length on an APS-C camera...
 
I have both the Sigma 30mm f1.4 and Sigma 50mm f1.4. They both seem like great lenses to me and the HSM is lovely and you get a hood and a case with each lens.
 
As I already have the Sigma 30, I don't see the point in the 35 really, although I have been tempted recently (but I just love buying lenses at the moment). I've just sold the 1.8 and bought the 1.4 so I'm dying to pick it up over the weekend to give it a whirl.
 
I've also got the Sigma 30mm and 50mm f1.4. Picked up before the Nikon 50 1.4 came out, but they haven't been used as much as they deserve. And they do deserve to be used as the iq is beautiful... must make an effort to use them more, the problem being they aren't normaly in the bag :bang:
 
I have the Nikon 50 F/1.8 and the 35 F/1.8 on a D40x. I use the 35 way more than the 50, so I'd seriously consider this lens too.
 
I went for the 35mm too, as I had a go of my mates 50mm and found it a little too long for what I was going to be using it for. I'd rather move a little closer to my subject than having to try and move back.
 
Hey guys, here's what the OP said:
AnnaV said:
I want a 50mm prime for Xmas
Click to expand...

and then after many inputs she said:

AnnaV said:
See I think I do want a 50mm ... I really do like the 50mm having thought about it properly.
Click to expand...

So there wouldn't seem to be much need for this:

Flash In The Pan said:
I find 50mm a quite restrictive focal length on an APS-C camera...
Click to expand...
richardod said:
I use the 35 way more than the 50, so I'd seriously consider this lens too.
Click to expand...
swordjo said:
I went for the 35mm too ... I'd rather move a little closer to my subject than having to try and move back.
Click to expand...

She's got a mind of her own, you know.
 
I've not used the Sigma, but I can't believe it's £100 better than the Nikon, if at all noticeably better! Add in the greater possibility of getting a duffer from Sigma, and I'd go Nikon every time on this one!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top