The new Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras ships tomorrow (7/18/2008).
Adorama still doesn’t have a specific ship date.
Related posts:
- Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras pricing now available!
- Nikon to concentrate on “high-end digital single-lens reflex cameras”
- Top selling cameras for September 2008
- Sigma APO 200-500mm F2.8 EX DG super telezoom lens for Nikon
- Nikon lens wish list (Nikon AF-S 50mm, Nikon AF-S 30mm rumor/prediction)
20 Comments
yes, but isn’t the AF-S (HSM) suppose to be faster and not so noisy? AF-S is suppose to be future proof – isn’t Nikon moving in that direction?
Actually we are just about to exchange links with another site that you may find interesting (I do): http://www.dearnikon.com
again, there is another reason – I think Nikon is moving towards AF-S future, so getting the lens now makes it compatible in the future
Take a trip to Miami and buy a camera!
Almost all Nikon lenses are backwards compatible – I think Canon changed their mount few years ago, so if you have an old canon lens, you cannot use it today (without a converter).
Reviews are coming in that this Sigma is WAY better than the Nikon, and worth every penny. Not only is it HSM, it has all-metal construction and an optical “weight” that is most alike the Canon 50 1.2 actually.
The images I’ve seen from it so far, well, they blow my Nikon 50 1.4 away…
They wouldn’t charge $499 if it were the “affordable alternative” to the ~$300 Nikon…
=Matt=
actually, BH Photo can send stuff to us here, but they don’t send nikon pro bodies (DXXX or DX), it takes about 20 days to arrive, and they are taxed about 35% over retail price. still a aceptable option.
BUT, i live right next to paraguay (80 miles from here) , and the prices there are about 10~30% more than US, (you can find only nikon/canon gear a bit of sony alpha bodies, a bit of sigma lenses, and that’s it) i get all my stuff there, but hoping not to get busted on the return home. hahaha! =D
Remember the D40 is a “Bridge” camera, its primary purpose is to get the Point-and-Shoot camera people “hooked” on a DSLR camera body. So when it was time to upgrade, people would spend more money on D80’s & D300’s, etc.
I also think that Nikon never expected for the D40 users to be interested in fast “prime” lenses. I think their marketing dept. only saw the kit lens and 55-200mm VR/Non-VR being used on the D40.
As for it mounting all of the lenses from 1959 to present, I think this was to make up for the lack of the Auto-Focus Motor.
This is pretty much only good for D40(x)/D60 users that want a prime 50mm with autofocus. Otherwise I’m sure the quality of the Nikon 50mm’s are much nicer.
Actually, I’d buy this forr the HSM, much nicer than the in camera motor. It also wouldn’t suprise me if build and IQ were near identicle.
nice. even Sigma began to update the lenses before nikon.
Thanks nikon, for launching cameras without lens cervo and then, almost 2 years later still don’t updade one of the most popular large aperture lens (50mm F/1.8).
I have a D40 over more than a year, and I feel like a fool when i see this neglect from nikon.
obviously, i knew about the cervo issue when i got my d40, but honestly, i’ve never imagined that nikon would take so long to update at least the most popular lenses.
now, about sigma.. i had for a few days a 30mm F/1.4. it is an awesome piece of glass. really, the image quality is absolute, the HSM is speed is fantastic and the most interesting, is a “low” cost lens. if the 50mm glass comes just as good, it will sell like water on the desert. and i hope so.
I’m sorry, but what? What are you talking about? You bought a D40. The Sigma 50mm 1.4 is 500 dollars. That’s 200 more than the Nikon 50mm f/1.4. The reason the Nikkors are so popular is because they are a steal for their quality and build. If this was a real issue, you should have bought a D80 and then a Nikkor 50mm 1.4 for the extra 100 bucks it would have cost you.
Nikon isn’t Canon. They aren’t a huge company. They can barely put out enough cameras to match demand. Where you think they will magically find engineers to devote to lenses which are already perfectly functional and bestsellers is beyond me.
I understand your line of thinking. but is easy to say that when you live on US or europe.
i live in Brazil.. a Nikon D40 with brazilian taxes (wich are about 50% of the retail price on US) costs about 2200 R$. that is 1366 US$. then you think that the minimum payment here is 415 R$ or, 257 US$, things change a lot. the D80 costs almost twice as a D40 here.
it took me more than 6 months to get the money for a D40.
Ah, ok. Then that’s completely different. I apologize. I just assumed you lived in the US or where D80 and D40s were relatively close together.
nevermind. =)
you don’t have how to know where i live, and how stuff works here, if i don’t say either.
anyway, i liked to know what you said about the engineers.. i’ve never seen anything about that before. i always knew that they were a little smaller than canon, but not that small. i’m quite surprised with that.
Well the general feeling among photographers is that Canon is a much larger corporation. They have about 8x as many employees as Nikon and make an annual revenue that is about 5x as much as Nikon. This is because they aren’t strictly camera makers and most of their revenue actually comes from other electronics they produce, but this added revenue affords them more factories, engineers, and opportunities. For example, when Canon releases a pro line body (1d series), there is no line and supply is usually met within a week. When Nikon releases pro line cameras, they release them first to the “pros” who have already owned a D# camera and then to the general public because they have problems fulfilling immediate demand. This is also evident in lenses.
As for engineers, Nikon has chosen to go a different route with their lenses. They produce few lenses that they believe will last a long time and have superior quality. Canon produces many lenses (take the 70-200 as an example — there are four current versions of it available: 2.8, 2.8IS, 4, 4IS) that overlap and hope that the market will buy the one that fits their needs. This difference in strategy also gives Canon a better list of primes (50mm f/1, f/1.2, etc). Canon tends to go for speed while Nikon focuses on specialty lenses (PC-E, DC, Micro, etc) because (I believe) they feel that speed will be overcome with greater sensor capabilities but you will never have a sensor that can mimic PC-E or DC lenses. Anyways… the point is that the different goals of each company means Nikon will have less engineers than Canon since they don’t need to pound out a new lens every week and also that the company will not focus on lenses which it feels are already performing well (the 50mm f/1.8 and f/1.4 are bestsellers by any standard).
Do I think the 50mm f/1.4 needs an update? Not really, but I can understand why. However, if you compare the Canon 50 f/1.4 USM to the Nikon 50 f/1.4 without the motor, the Canon is $50 more and not even close to as sharp when wide open (slrgear.com for tests). Would I give up the sharpness of the 50 for USM? Not a chance.
My Hobby ships site
This entry was posted on Thursday, November 30th, 2006 at 3: 28 pm and is filed under Gadgets , ArsGeek , Just Plain Geek. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2. 0 feed. You can leave a response , or trackback from your own site. Other posts you may like Turn an old CRT into a new hotness fish tank Comment on I have created LIFE! by Barnze Humans 1 Cats 0 and a night of reality tv/ Ghic’ s geeky ideas win again The Linux Gamer reviews Savage:
euxbhzef
euxbhzef
euxbhzef
euxbhzef
[URL=http://whobqnra.comniwxjxhh/URL] xibkxcaw http://qqjexhpo.com uadwzlqa flkhqvcj hjjqbean“>http://kwmypmtl.com“>hjjqbean