< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art lens now available for pre-order at $949

Sigma-50mm-f1.4-DG-HSM-Art-lens-US-price
The US price of the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art lens will be $949 (as previously reported). B&H is currently taking pre-orders for the Nikon version.

Update: Adorama and Amazon are now also taking pre-orders.

Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art lens MTF charts:

Sigma-50mm-f1.4-DG-HSM-Art-lens-MTF-chart
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art lens design:

Sigma-50mm-f1.4-DG-HSM-Art-lens-design
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art lens specifications:

Lens Construction 13 Elements in 8 Groups
Angle of View 46.8º
Number of Diaphragm Blades 9
Mininum Aperture f16
Minimum Focusing Distance 40 cm / 15.7 in
Filter Size (mm) 77mm
Maximum Magnifications 1: 5.6
Dimensions
(Diameter x Length)
85.4 x 99.9 mm/ 3.4 x 3.9 in
Weight 815g / 28.7oz.

Sigma-50mm-f1.4-DG-HSM-Art-lens-price-US
The new 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art lens is compatible with the Sigma USB lens dock that can perform firmware updates and focus adjustment:

Sigma-120-300mm-f2.8-DG-OS-HSM-Lens-USB-dock
Sigma-50mm-f1.4-Art-lens-price
The full Sigma press release can be found at PhotoRumors.

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Theodoros Fotometria

    Given the performance as described by the first reviews, it seems a very reasonable price with respect to competition. I believe that the next “Art”-series primes that should be announced, should be a 85-90mm prime for portraits and a 24mm WA… Sigma’s decision to challenge the best around can only be welcomed… it can only help competition to grow for photographer’s benefit.

    • wondering

      How is this better than nikon 50mm/ 1.4 at half price?

      • DuncanM

        Technically the Sigma performs better in pretty much all areas. In practical, real world applications Nikon’s 50s work fine. I guess it depends on what you want from your lenses.

        • Mansgame

          That is until you get a new camera that won’t be compatible with it and have to send it to Sigma to rechip.

          • Jeremy Allen

            The USB dock solves this problem.

            • A Photographer

              Indeed. The new Sigma has excellent wide open sharpness in combination with butter sweet boke (not bokeh) before and after the focal plane. That is where you buy this lens for, and that is where it differs mainly from with the best of Nikon and Canon.

            • david

              this lens is sharper, no this lens is sharper. this lenses has better contrast, no this lens has better contrast. this lens will make me a better image maker. this is all bs. hell, galen rowell, henri cartier bresson and even ansel adams when he shot with, as he called it his miniature (35mm) camera, all produced images that 99% of the posters on this site could not even come close to and they did it with so called inferior camera’s and lenses. quit reading mtf charts and marketing pr. really hone your skills with the tools that you already have and that will make you a better image maker. i will use this analogy, put tiger woods clubs in your hands and 99% of the weekend golfers will still shoot like crap but put your clubs into his hands and he still will shoot exceptionally well. be happy with the tools you have and go out and enjoy image making and don’t stress out if you have the best equipment.

            • Bob

              Rowell, Bresson, and Adams all primarily shot stopped down, not wide open. In Adams’ case, it was often at f/32 or f/64 due to the film size.
              This Sigma lens is for shooting wide open at f/1.4 and still getting sharp images. If you don’t need that, get a 50/1.8 and stop down, or just get any old kit zoom and shoot at f/8 to f/16. You’ll save a lot of money that way (and weight).
              Also, I have many of Rowell’s books. Soft corners abound in his photos, especially with the wide angle shots. It typically doesn’t detract from the image, but some times it does.

            • david disyefano

              you are not understanding what i am saying. their images are great not because if the equipment but because the images move people. as the saying goes, there is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept, and for what i see, that saying can be used on a vast, vast amount of photographic images today. also the wide open shooting that is in vogue today, is really getting pretty boring as is imo digital photography in general. now with sony making the sensors for many different cameras both ff and mf, it is like everyone is basically using the same film. maybe that is why film sales continue to increase over the last 5 years from their lows because it offers the artist a new, for this generation, of looking at the world.

            • kotozafy

              I undestand that almost all manufacturing advances make you sad. That makes me very sad because you will be sad all you life.

            • outkasted

              Haha I love the way everyone compares the greats…lol. If Rowell, Bresson and Adams were still alive they will go Ape shit over these products. As a matter of fact they will be on the forums just like us debating oh and wowing us with superior imagery

            • david

              they probably would but i doubt edward weston would. and since they are the cream of the crop, like tiger woods in golf, they would be the photographers who could get out of the best lenses the images that would sing. again for the 99% who never will be able to fully utilize the abilities of exceptional lenses it is just a waste of time and money.

            • frank

              Possibly. But I’ve got a feeling that Adams would have a walk-in freezer full of 8×10 Plus-X and Tri-X film. I could see Galen using both since he was a 35mm user while Adams wasn’t.

              That said, I think everyone would agree that had Galen used MF his images would have held up better in enlargement. That’s the price paid for portability and the plethora of lens options one has in 35mm/DSLR vs medium format. Or in other words, the ability to get the shot.

            • Nobody Cares

              Have you been to Mountain Light Gallery? Anything you’ve seen of his in a book, or a magazine, is a pale imitation of the images he captured. Maybe they’d look better if he’d shot MF, but my home isn’t so big that I’d need a larger print that the larger prints at MLG and they’re stunning.

            • jvossphoto

              Rowell was all about getting the best images he could with going as light as he could. Nobody expects someone climbing mount Everest to pack a MF system. On the other hand Adams shot almost all his images from the top of his car. He had it modified so that he could stand on top of it with his LF set-up.

            • umeshrw

              ” but put your clubs into his hands and he still will shoot exceptionally well.–
              Yes to that but with these better lenses their pictures would have been better. Come to think of it , if these lenses would have been available in their time then would they still have used those inferior lenses? Also these lenses may not be as effective for street shooting but for studio work or tripod work these lenses’ sharpness and corner performance would make a difference. I have seen some PGs street work which is made using older lenses which are not as sharp but have a certain characteristic properties ( instead of good current perfect lenses) and it shows in the image. such bockelicious lenses with character fall under that category. I have a rule regarding these things…. If I cannot make out why it costs this much and people are buying it at such high costs then I haven’t reached that level and the equipment is not ridiculously priced. We all know — for 90 % quality we pay 100 % and for 10 % more we have to pay 200%. If we do not understand that then it is our fault. Of course I have not included the filthy rich amateur ( can buy and so will have the priciest which must be the best) category here. It is a class in its own.

            • frank

              “If I cannot make out why it costs this much and people are buying it at such high costs then I haven’t reached that level…”
              I agree with your point here. Being able to appreciate the difference is part of the formula of justifying any purchase regardless if it’s Dryer’s vs Ben & Jerry’s or Sigma vs Leica. The individual must be content with the value/performance ratio as diminishing returns comes into play.

            • outkasted

              But its still dont negate the fact that ummmm…its sharper! Waaaay Sharper and contrastier…So there :P

            • kotozafy

              So go and sell your computer, use cartier Bresson’s typewriter!

            • King

              Exactly. Give me tiger wood’s women, i will be better than him.

            • Spy Black

              It’s the 21st century now. You have some more options…

            • Jo

              But I want to shoot a wedding brides left eye wide open though!!! Get with the left eye in focus program!! Sarcasm

            • Mansgame

              Yeah I’m sure your client will understand that when you cancel the shoot and have to wait a month for a firmware update to come down.

            • Jeremy Allen

              When would any pro worth his salt use an untested lens/body combination on a shoot? I have 2 sigmas that are well over 10 years old and never had issues as I’ve upgraded bodies.

            • Spy Black

              Mansgame is obviously not a pro.

            • KnightPhoto

              Mansgame is a working pro.

            • rt-photography

              and you are only you. you didnt do a worldwide statistic check and im certain there are many with horror stories. more so than nikon for sure.

          • kotozafy

            This is a good point Sigma has a rechipping service !

          • JOEY

            are you seriously nuts? can u bring an example of this happening in the past?

            • KnightPhoto

              I had to send my Sigma 50mm in when I got my D4; for video it wouldn’t AF. I sent it in with the case, and didn’t realize till months later I never got the case back. Gotta remember to go back to them on that…

        • outkasted

          hey Duncan its really at 1.4 where the men from the boys get separated. I own a 50mm Nikon. I thought it was and is a beautiful lensbut my siggy 35mm/1.4 mops the floor with it any where arounf the 1.4 – 3.5 aperture mark Siggy is just sooo much sharper. #D700 and my siggy shall never part
          .

        • nikclick

          Size f& weight or a 50mm is a draw back when compared to Nikon 50s.

          On the other side those who don’t mind that would be happy to see 77mm filter :)

          • outkasted

            OMG though sharpness at 1.4 is so stunning using the sigma. Not much on my 50mm/1.4 Nikon G. I thought it it was but my own comparison blew me away!

      • Mansgame

        It’s not. Sigma has had a horrible reputation with their quality control, sharpness, and general build quality so this is their attempt to say they are legit and in the same ball park as Zeiss. They are in fact the Hyundai of lenses. I won’t buy neither.

        • Chris

          Except their new series of lenses have outperformed Nikon and Canon so your statement is just that of despair. I personally own the Sigma 35 1.4 and as soon as I shot with it goodbye Nikon version. Also firmware can be upgraded via the dock if their is future incompatibility soooooo ya please feel free to complain without informing yourself. Read more, complain yes :)

          • bob2

            The issue is not right now, but future compatibility and support. What happens when Sigma no longer supports the lens–5, maybe 10 years–if Sigma is no longer writing updates or the dock is outdated, the thing may be as good as worthless. Good luck trying to get parts or repair on an older out-of-production Sigma lens–It’s as good as abandoned. With Nikon and Canon there’s parts and repair available. Plus all the generally accurate reputation about poor quality control (decentered elements is very common), cheap build and materials (thinner materials, cutting corners, stuff you can’t see until it’s too late), etc. All this is my personal, not internet fora, experience. Still, I use one Sigma lens that until recently had no Nikon equivalent.

            I expect the first batch of lenses to be excellent optically because Sigma knows it will get the most buzz and review. I’d be careful with subsequent/later purchases, as I can only imagine quality control coming back to Sigma standards–becaue QC means rejecting bad samples which means increased costs. If you are willing to accept these risks and known problems, then go for it!

            • Chris

              Since you’re just making stuff up let’s point out some facts. The original 50mm 1.4 sigma still works and how old is that again??? Oh and the 85 1.4 as well?? Hmmm… odd. Those are nearing your threshold and still run just fine on the D4s which just launched. Weird?? Secondly I purchased my 35mm 1.4 Sigma about 8 months after launch and right out the box it need no micro adjustment and was blisteringly sharp compared to the Nikon 35mm 1.4 I had to micro adjust in order to get proper focus and once it was worked fine. Weird how someone who re-engineers a mount can do it better. Guess I’ll only buy OEM products for my car cause no one makes a better one.

            • outkasted

              Ditto! My siggy needed no Micro adjust on #D700

            • outkasted

              hmmm maybe i will join the pre order bandwagon again because my 35mm is flawless

          • Mansgame

            How have they outperformed them? There is no way to tell that unless after 5 years you can look back and see whether the lens still works, how much it’s still worth, and whether it even works. Sigma reverse engineers Nikon’s cameras to make their lenses. They are guessing. In the last 5 years the 50mm 1.4g that’s half the price is still going strong.

            • Chris

              Ummm quality, sharpness, image rendering. The 5 year old sigma 50 1.4 that is already in the market works just fine. You’re digging for excuses. Accept the fact others want this lens and you’re just playing arm chair comedian with unsubstantiated nonsense. :)

            • rt-photography

              with shitty af accuracy…otherwise I would have bought it a long time ago. thats the big problem with sigma. their af system is fix as we go and you can see it in the photos. I had all sigma glass. it all sucked focus wise.

          • rt-photography

            who the fuck needs to upgrade when you buy nikon tamron tokina zeiss pentax sony..?

            only sigma needs that shit and that says everything.

          • koenshaku

            buyer reviews are really missed with that lens though. I hear there are a lot of defective models and I didn’t like Matt Granger’s review on youtube either…

        • umeshrw

          — I won’t buy neither.—
          When are you buying them ?

        • http://www.marcjwrzphoto.com/ Marc J.

          “…won’t buy neither?”

          Sigh.

          • Mansgame

            And now the grammar police have arrived.

            • Chris

              Maybe if you spent time using the gear instead of arguing it you wouldn’t have forgotten how to use words good.

            • Patrick O’Connor

              umm… It should be “…use words well,” not that it matters.

            • http://www.marcjwrzphoto.com/ Marc J.

              When you use language so poorly that it invalidates your opinion and makes you look foolish?

              Yeah, folks will comment on that.

            • Fff

              Actually you are doing a great job at making yourself look like a fool.

              Congratulations you are “smart”.

            • http://www.marcjwrzphoto.com/ Marc J.

              Smarter than the average troll at least!

            • mikeswitz

              Calling anyone who corrects your grammer just highlights your ignorance. Your lack of communication skills are manifest.

        • http://www.marcjwrzphoto.com/ Marc J.

          “…won’t buy neither?”

          Sigh.

        • outkasted

          My Hyundai is still going strong oh and Hyundai cars are one of the longest lasting modern day cars out there

          • Mansgame

            You mis-spelled Honda ;)

        • kotozafy

          25 years ago, my Sigma zoom was the most horrible lens I ever had. I swore I would never buy Sigma again. 25 years later, my Sigma 35mm 1.4 is the best lens I ever had. Similarlly Hyunday has made impressive progress in the past 5 years.

          • frank

            Agree, their new body styles are as good as Lexus or BMW. However, their performance is not up to par with either BMW or Lexus. So they look good and are reliable – eh, two out of three ain’t bad.
            I still wouldn’t buy one over a BMW (speaking as a Bimmer owner:)
            When I sold cameras back in the late 90s, Sigma was crap. Without question, their lenses came back more than Canon or Nikon combined. So they’ve dug a huge hole for themselves and it’s going to take a series of products that have substantial WOW! factor to change people’s minds. They seem to be on the right path though – good for them!

        • rt-photography

          hyundai..nice reference. I see who they are..that A insignia doesnt fool me.

          you can wrap shit, put a bow on it and even pretty it up as you see fit, but its not going to be nutella.

          sharper or not. that SHIT (pun intended) is overpriced.

          who the fuck do they think they are zeiss. 3 lenses and they think people forgot the thousands of crap lenses they sold for years and years. images softer than a babies bottoms no matter how much you stopped it down.

      • Theodoros Fotometria

        Read the reviews…

      • Cos

        I own nikon 50mm 1.4G. On D800e it delivers mediocre results.

      • Radiating

        The new Sigma is around twice as good as the Nikon 50mm f/1.4 in almost every dimension.

        If you’re asking these kinds questions though I don’t think you understand how important this Sigma lens is. I’ll paraphrase a post of mine to further answer your question though.

        Sigma says it is positioning this lens to not even be remotely in competition with any other 50mm lens on the market. And all reviews have pointed to them being right. What that means is this 50mm lens makes all other non-zeiss competitors obsolete. It’s like comparing a Mercedes AMG versus a snail in a race, it’s just a different class.

        The reason for this is that 50mm lenses have traditionally been of the double gauss (planar) design, which severely limits image quality at fast apertures. It’s a very poor archaic design that results in around 4 times worse performance in every image clarity measurement. The reason for this is that to make a double gauss lens properly you would have to put elements inside of the mirror box to make the lens sharp. Because you can’t put elements inside your mirror all 50mm lenses prior to 2014 for DSLRs have been soft. The only upside to the double gauss design is a slightly more compact lens. There is literally no planar lens that performs even passably well wide open. The Zeiss Otus was the first retrofocal normal lens for full frame cameras and it showed there was a night and day difference compared to the double gauss design. The Sigma 50mm ART is the second.

        Planar lenses have extremely poor performance wide open, lets use the lens rentals 50mm comparison as an example (http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/01/the-great-50mm-shootout), which tested 23 planar normal lenses. At f/1.4 planar lenses achieved scores in the 300s and 400s in that test for average MTF50 resolution. For comparison the Zeiss Otus delivers average resolution of 800. That’s just under 5 times more spacial resolution than the lens it supersedes, the Zeiss 1.4 Planar, @ f/1.4. (remember we have to square linear resolution data to get normal resolution)

        If you look at other points of comparison you can see that planar 50mm lenses scored poorly in haziness/glowiness and purple fringing, and often scored poorly in chromatic aberration, usually by a factor of 3-5.

        It doesn’t take a genius to see why this is important. We just went from having the sharpest 50mm prime being literally the bottom of the barrel, delivering image quality so poor camera phones from several years ago beat them when they are wide open to having a lens that is one of the sharpest primes money can buy. It’s like comparing unarmed chimpanzees with nuclear weapons. The lens doubles or triples everything we know about 50mm lenses at the least.

        This lens is the greatest improvement in image quality that has ever happened in DSLR photography.

        http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/14111704/img/Picture-Box/Retrofocalvsplanar50mm.jpg

        http://media.the-digital-picture.com/Images/Lens-Tests/ISO-12233/Zeiss-50mm-f-1.4-Planar-ZE-Lens/Crop2/2010-05-19_15-02-05.jpg

        Double Gauss lens f/1.4 (Zeiss 1.4 Planar)

        http://media.the-digital-picture.com/Images/Lens-Tests/ISO-12233/Sigma-35mm-f-1.4-EX-DG-HSM-Lens/Crop2/2012-12-04_09-36-38.jpg

        Retrofocal Lens f/1.4 (Sigma, 35mm 1.4 – remember the 50mm 1.4 ART is slightly better than this, but this makes for a clear comparison):

    • A Photographer

      No the next lens will be a 135mm F/2 lens, which will be previewed in an excellent fantastic the best camera magazine there is :-)
      Unfortunately I’m not the one who will do the actual testing of this lens

      • Theodoros Fotometria

        It may be… I don’t have a crystal ball, but choosing 135mm f2 for next release won’t continue to “shake waters” as they now do… All existing 135 f1.8/2.0 lenses are so superb that none gives a dime to better what he invested on…. Same happens with all 85-105 for portraiture or for macro work… But a 90mm f2.0 macro 1:1, is something unique, not because it will better any of either the portraiture or the macro offerings, but rather because it’ll combine them.

        • Paul

          i am an enthusiast. I already have a 50 and 105 macro. I don’t have a 135mm. If there are many like me, there will be a good market for this Sigma 135

          • DuncanM

            Nikon’s 135/2 DC is one of the best portrait lenses ever made. Even if Sigma did a 135 I doubt it could top it.

            • Paul

              you may be right – but we will have to see. I’m not investing until post-release and hopefully a hands on

            • KnightPhoto

              I too would be interested in a Sigma 135mm f/2 that is sharp and focuses fast. It wouldn’t be the highest use lens for me, but would have uses, and price would be a factor because of lower usage. I’d also be interested in a new Nikon 135mm f/2. I never rule out a Nikon, because I would be amortizing any price difference anticipating I would get 10 years use out of the lens. I did sell my Nikon 135mm f/2 but main reason was it wasn’t hugely sharp wide open in theatre and something had to give when I went from a D700 to a D4.

              For this 50mm ART I would also seriously compare it’s rendering to the Nikon 58mm f/1.4. I actually like very much what I have seen out of the Nikon. The Nikon is probably one lens I’d like to rent to see what my images would look like in actual usage. Anyhow for now, and the amount of use, I’ll stand pat with my current model Sigma f/1.4 (non-ART).

            • Joven

              There is always room for improvement. OS, sharper corners, better controlled CA.

              I wish people would stop acting like the D series broke the mold for every lens when a newer version of it comes out.

              58mm 1.4G comes out, and everyone started crying that it’s no 1.2 NOCT, but went silent when the 1.4G beat it in comparison tests (images and charts).

              There’s always room for improvement.

            • outkasted

              lol…you jest.

            • Spy Black

              Time does march on you know.

          • Theodoros Fotometria

            If you already have 105micro why look for 135 next? Wouldn’t the 180mm f2.8 serve your needs better? …that’s my suggestion anyway.

            • Paul

              i haven’t even really thought about that one. I like the focal length of the 105mm but the focus is really finicky when doing head/shoulders portraits. I’ve done it successfully, but I feel like I’m spraying/praying a bit. I’ve heard that the 135 and 70-200 have much easier AF when doing head shots. the 180 the same I guess. I see what you are saying though, that the 135 is not going to ‘look’ that much different than the 105. I also shoot indoor sports occasionally and the 180 might be too long. I’ll have to buy both now. thanks a lot. :)

        • Joven

          The 35 and 50 didn’t “shake the waters” b/c of their focal length. You could argue that the 50mm ART didn’t need to be release b/c 50mm is already such a standard lens, plus Canon, Nikon AND Sigma already have 50mm 1.4s.

          What has put life into the Sigma lenses is that the 35mm is sharper AND less expensive than its 1st party counterparts, plus the 50mm is looking like it’ll be on the same company as the Nikon 58mm 1.4G, Canon 50mm 1.2L, Zeiss Otus 55mm 1.4…. but cheaper.

          If Sigma did that with the 85 and/or 135 ART, I think it would shake things up a bit. However, I hope they focus on their 24-70 and 70-200 first :).

          • Theodoros Fotometria

            What are you talking about? Both the “ART” lenses, 35&50 are exotic retrofocal designs like the Otus also is… what Canikons have to do with exotic designs? ….they are simply “just” very good lenses… nothing to do with the “ARTs” however… not in the hands of one who knows how to use them anyway….

        • hussey

          The newest Zeiss 135 is considered the best lens you can get for less than $3,000, possibly the best lens period. If Sigma can match it for $699, with autofocus, they’ll be a lot sold. But I agree that a 90mm macro would be nice too!

          • Joven

            They just released a 50mm for $950, but you think a Sigma 135mm would retail for $700? o.O

            • hussey

              The Zeiss 50mm is $4000, the Zeiss 135mm (considered the best) is $2199. That was the comparison I was making. 50mm is harder to correct and has more elements, I am told.

          • Theodoros Fotometria

            “The best lens you can get”… doesn’t exist!

            • hussey

              What does that mean?

    • Peter Rothengatter

      I’ve hold this lens in my hands last week and h#ly sh#t it’s so BIG! I think it’s 10x so big as a nikkor 1.4/50mm AF D lens I bought for 100$ why?

      • Theodoros Fotometria

        Because it’s a “retrofocal” design… It simply doesn’t apply to people that want “another good standard lens”… it’s a high end design for absolute performance, Otus is even bigger for the same reasons.

  • blp

    it would be nice if they introduce an art 105 to 135mm macro prime lens

    • Theodoros Fotometria

      I was thinking of a 90mm f2 micro 1:1 instead… it could combine both portrait and macro needs and with the use of a dedicated 1.4x TC, it would let the lens “jump” up to 2:1 at 126mm which is a “perfect” working distance for much of macro work lens.

      • http://gplimages.com/ TheFantasticG

        That would tempt me pretty hardcore to give up my beloved Tamron 90mm 2.8 II macro lens…

    • Sashimi

      If they managed to make a 135mm f/2 for nikon as good as the king of canon primes, they’d make a lot of money…

    • preston

      Sigma has been pushing the standards recently of what can be done (like a f/1.8 zoom), so maybe they can release a 105 f/1.8 macro (1:1, not 1:2 like some of their other “macro” lenses), but if it was going to be f/2.8 like the CaNikon versions then I’d rather see them drop the macro ability and just make the fast portrait version. After all, we already have a very high quality but affordable 90 f/2.8 Tamron while Nikon’s fast 105 and 135 DC lenses came out over 20 years ago.

      • Theodoros Fotometria

        I don’t think 105mm f1.8 micro 1:1 is feasible… at least not at a reasonable price… 90mm f2 is feasible however and it could offer both a “right” distance in FL from 50mm and a unique lens with respect to competition that could unite both a portrait and a macro lens… Even pros that use faster than this lenses for portraiture, they don’t use their faster settings for more than 1/100 of their shooting… and even then, the “trash” bucket “eats” what they shot at full aperture! OTOH…. f2.8 is too slow for portraiture… f2 is about the fastest and what is used on 70% (roughly counted) of the pro “portraiture” cases….

    • Deep_Lurker

      My first thought was “next up: 85mm f/1.4 ART”

  • Patrick Jakubowski

    This lens looks very interesting. I wonder how good microcontrast is. It is hard to find any info on microcontrast of sigma primes.

    • bossa

      The red lines in the MTF are contrast and the green the so-called resolution. One would expect astigmatism, measured here in the separation of the same-coloured lines, to effect micro-contrast in some way.

  • xt

    nikon will release a firmware update for all its DSLR for this len, to make it always out of focus.

    • Rene

      Not much, just slightly, so that it matches the AF-S 50mm 1.4 wide open. Lol.

      So Nikon is rethinking the AF-S 50mm 1.2 right now?

      • Dream On

        Can’t be done.
        Not unless you want a new mount……….

        • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

          This has been debunked like fifty times over. The only obstacle might have been to build on with a mechanical AF coupling. That’s not a problem for AFS designs.

          http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/mf/normal/50mmf_12/index.htm

          The better question is: is the 1/3 of a stop necessary? And can it be done without sacrificing other optical qualities? For instance, the Canon 50/1.2 has hideous bokeh wide open.

          Nikon probably won’t waste their time doing anything else in the 50 range. The 58 is their premium 50, and it had different design goals–and it acheived them! Coma is excellent on that lens! Sure, they sacrificed ultimate resolution, but the end effect is still pretty cool. At least in my opinion.

          But I wouldn’t mind a surprise from Nikon!

          • Sashimi

            you mean the Df kind of surprise ? Thx very much but no thx….

          • Joven

            I used to have 1.2 envy for the 85 and 50 on Canon, but to be honest, I can’t stand how soft they look when at 1.2, and the CA at 1.2 is rough. Not to mention the lack of contrast when shooting that open.

            It’d be great for sales, but it wouldn’t do much more than give something gear heads and fanboys to talk about.

            • Paul

              yes – agreed

            • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

              The 85 is still an amazing optic, and I’ll defend it as such. But the 50 is a bit of a flop.

              The Nikon 200mm/2 however, is an unassailable beast!

            • Joven

              I don’t think it’s a bad lens, I just think it’s overrated. There’s a subtle difference ;-)

            • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

              Neither of my Nikon 50s (old D and newer G) look this bad wide open for a full length shot: http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/472-canon_50_12_5d?start=1
              (see close to the bottom of the page)

          • Eric Calabros

            CA in 58 is just 2um. you can consider it as nonexistent

          • umeshrw

            – Nikon probably won’t waste their time doing anything else in the 50 range.–
            You think so? Look what they released recently in the done to death Dx range.

            • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

              Yeah, but those are lenses with high ROI, low productions costs, large production runs, and fast design refresh cycles.

          • MB

            Nope … f/1.2 is the maximum aperture for Nikon F mount, but unfortunately CPU chip limits that and makes it optically impossible so we will never see any new lens that fast …

            • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

              You’re totally right. I’m sure they were developing FF 50/1.2 formulas to patent for some other manufacturer’s mount.

            • MB

              You have a point … actually I was forgetting the obvious fact that FX frame is rectangular so you can block part of the image circle and still get f/1.2 aperture …
              It would be interesting to see how Nikon managed to mount CPU without gluing it directly to rear glass but if they figure that it is doable.
              They should remove mechanical aperture lever and use electronic control as in PC-E or new 800mm to give some more space and if they make corner cutouts in the lens mount they could probably go even beyond f/1.2.
              On the other hand current 58mm f/1.4 at 1600$ is very good lens but people were expecting more from it and it can not compete with Ziess Otus and it seams this new Sigma Art. So if this new hypothetical lens is a bit better price tag will most certainly be way over 2000$ and it is not clear how big the demand will be for a normal lens at that price range …

          • simba

            f/1.4 to f/1.2 is 1/2 of a stop.

            • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

              Nope. Third stops it goes 1, 1.1, 1.2, 1.4

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-number

              If you look at the design numbers quoted for most f1.2 lenses, you’ll see that they’re designed about 1.23 or some such number. Always smaller than 1.2. And in T-stops they’re certainly not a full stop brighter than 1.4 lenses, so arguing over the numbers is kinda academic.

    • Matt

      Yes, but with the USB dock, Sigma has made it more difficult for Nikon to play those sort of games.

      • bob2

        For how long and how often. Do you want your precious Sigma lenses to malfunction every time Nikon updates its firmware? What if/when Sigma no longer supports the lens–how long do you want to wait for an update? If you are an amateur, this may not matter. But a pro needs his/her gear to be first and foremost DEPENDABLE.

        BTW, Nikon has no duty to Sigma. If you had spent millions and 50 years of your life on your own private business, would you like someone else trying to steal your business?

        • Bob

          Careful, some of the foam coming from your mouth is about to drip off and land on your sour grapes.

        • Chris

          It’s called competition. I guess you’ve nevr heard of this cause you’re the bestest photographer ever and no one compares. :)

        • umeshrw

          – What if/when Sigma no longer supports the lens–how long do you want to wait for an update?–
          Damn, we wait a lot for nikon update itself. How many updates and for how long does nikon bring out for their own cameras anyway?

          • Cyrille Berger

            Nikon updates its camera firmware every 100 years, we just have not reached the first update of their first product yet.

      • Mansgame

        Yeah rite. How fast is Sigma going to produce an update?

        • Chris

          Faster than you’d think since you have no idea of knowing :)

  • Truth

    There goes Sigma being a cheaper alternative?

    • Theodoros Fotometria

      It is considerably cheaper than both the Otus (offering AF in advance) and the “questionable” Nikkor 58mm f1.4…. no?

      • Truth

        Yes, but those are different focal lengths.

        Sony Zeiss 55mm 1.8 is a better contender & good value against Otus.

        Nikkor 58mm 1.4 seems to prioritize bokeh & coma over sharpness.

        • Theodoros Fotometria

          I do agree that Sigma’s FL range should be chosen to be in the 55-60mm range… It would supplement IMO the 35mm Art better and would provide a better “bridge” towards the “portrait” 85-105mm range… Given that 50mm is a little more “tele” than what “normal” should be, 55-60 FL wouldn’t affect a 50mm user at all on his habits… But still, the Sigma is not expected to be worst than the Nikkor 58 in coma or bokeh…

    • Mansgame

      They’re still like Hyundai . They put out a couple of “luxury” models but most people know they are crap.

      • Chris

        Jealous much???

        • Mansgame

          No, I have the real deal. All my lenses are made by Nikon, the same company that made the cameras and knows how the two talk. Someone driving a Lexus doesn’t look at someone driving the Hyundai “luxury” model and be jealous.

          • Bob

            “Made by Nikon” = made by Nikon’s contract manufacturing partners in China and Thailand … (unless you only own Nikon’s high-end, made-in-Japan products, which don’t include their two 50mm lenses)
            And yet, 100% of Sigma lenses are made in Japan, by Sigma themselves. Interesting.

          • Chris

            You’re analogy is all wrong. It’s like comparing a tires for cars such as Goodyear or Michelin. They both make tires just like Nikon and Sigma both make lenses. It’s an attachment to the camera not the camera itself. You should learn how analogies work and also you should learn that Nikon doesn’t make the best stuff. Where is my Nano Crystal Coat on my Nikon 50mm?? Oh wait… not there.

          • Phil999

            I have the ‘real deal’ too. I own 4 50mm Nikkors including the f/1.2 Ai, the 50mm f1.4G, the 50mm f/1.8D and a pre Ai f/1.4 but, knowing how good a job Sigma have made of their ART series I am seriously looking forward to trying this one.
            If you are not interested in a better lens than Nikon seem to be able to make that’s fine, but don’t kid yourself that you own the best, because you don’t.

    • chris

      This compares more to the Zeiss or Canon 50mm 1.2. Nikon’s most expensive 50mm currently doesn’t even have Nano Crystal Coat so it’s still not their top of the line. You should be comparing this to the Nikon 58mm 1.4 and then you’ll see the savings.

  • Tham

    The MTF chart doesn’t looks impressive

    • Russ Barnes

      I have to agree. Given the performance promised, the charts don’t entirely lend themselves to looking like all that, however when read in context with other 50mm 1.4 primes such as the Nikon 1.4G then the charts for the 1.4 Art lens look spectacular. I found this comparison here:

      http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52863003

      • Joe

        I’ll stay with my PC-E 45mm/2.8, MFT-wise. ;-)

        • Russ Barnes

          I certainly won’t argue with you there Joe, the MTF of the Nikon 45mm PC-e is every bit as good, if not better than the Sigma – but it’s also a £1400 lens so performance is expected. I think the Sigma is a different proposition, especially where AF and aperture are concerned. I intend to own both (I already shoot with the 45)…

          http://russbarnes.co.uk/search.html?q=45mm+pc-e

  • Parampreet Dhatt

    Shut up and take my money…

  • Yikes

    A thousand bucks for a Sigma 50mm??
    How times change.

    • Russ Barnes

      Change is good for once. At least with this lens you might feel you are getting something worth its money. Nikon and Canon have successfully added huge premiums to their lenses with in my view a lower level of return where there was compromise somewhere else. The 58mm f1.4 being a case in point, a ridiculously overpriced piece of kit.

    • Michal Lukáč

      4k for Zeiss Otus 55mm… hmmm. But still there are people buying… If there is market for Otus :D

      • guest

        There’s a market for any lens. There’s a million people out there calling themselves professional photographers. I just saw an “ad” on Craigslist from a baby photographer and the shot was of the kid on some dirty carpet against a wall, with the baseboard running along the floor. Called themselves a pro. Trying to sell that sort of work. Yikes!

        If people think a lens gives them an edge they’ll pay anything for it rather than give up doing what they love, or the only thing they know how to do. Otus, Summilux, Noctilux and now Sigma in its market. No different. I hope they sell a ton of them. As for me, I’ll stick with my little ‘cron.

  • BenHDisqus

    Just preordered through the link. Hope NR gets an affiliate commission.

  • Ms.KrystalMeth

    Waiting for more reviews..and I am renting in June for a shoot. If you don’t update your Nikon, Canon camera…this pup will do fine. Zeiss is producing a Otus 85mm 1.4. But both Nikon 85’s 1.4 and 1.8 G are excellent lenses! Sigma would truly have to hit a major home run on their 85.

    • Theodoros Fotometria

      That’s quite true… Even if a new “portrait” lens will be better than competition, it will do so among excellent lenses which already have the most demanding photographers “covered”… Another reason why I suggested above that it will may be a good idea to aim for something totally new… A 90mm f2 micro 1:1 could sound very attractive being both fast and macro capable…

    • Cos

      Nikon 85mm 1.8G is far from excellent. It has poor CA performance and microcontrast. You cannot compare it to 85mm 1.4G.

  • hussey

    This lens would sell much better at the 35mm art price of $799, I’m afraid. I think they’re just going to force folks to choose one or the other now. I wish my 35 was a 28! But I’ll have to wait to see more real world reviews. And why can’t they ship Nikon at the same time as Canon? arghh.

    • Theodoros Fotometria

      It all depends how one is used to work… For those (like me) that want UWAs down to 14/15mm, a 14-24-35 combination is perfect but they find 50mm too short, for those that make much use of their 50 (the previous ones think of 35 as “standard”), then it’s a 28 and perhaps an 18-21 for wider… Makers do offer both paths, I guess one has to wait a few years for the ART range to grow… Can’t have them all at once.

      • hussey

        I’m probably just used to it from my old school Konica film days. 28mm hit the sweet spot for people photography, where anything wider gets into the special effect category for me. I find myself wishing the 35 Art was just a bit wider.

        • Theodoros Fotometria

          I thought most (if not nearly all) of the masterpieces by Bresson, Capa, Kertez ..etc, where made using a 35mm lens!

          • hussey

            I’m not sure about that. Kertesz shot with bigger film, so he probably used a longer lens most of the time. Capa probably used something like a perspective of 35 for his wartime shots, but used 120 film at some point at least. Cartier-Bresson is famous for his use of 35mm FILM, but 50mm lenses were used quite often. Not that any of that matters, everyone has different needs and tastes. If I was going to sit in a trench and photograph blindly above my head, “spraying and praying” as Capa did for his most famous photograph, perhaps a 35mm would be my ideal length! (I’d still probably prefer a 28 though!)

  • DuncanM

    I was really hoping this would be cheaper, for my money I think I’d rather spend a bit more on a pre-loved 58/1.4. The Nikon’s 50s are already perform great on a D800, not sure this upgrade is worth 1k.

    • bossa

      The 50/1.4G is a piece of low contrast junk. I couldn’t get rid of mine fast enough.

      • DuncanM

        Good for you?

        • Michiel953

          50/1.4G? Very boring rendering. Got rid of mine very quickly.

      • xtt2

        use that lens several times, wondering why it is priced so high: it loses to my DX 35 1.8G at F2 on DX bodies. Other people said it is also worse then 50 1.4D.

  • simba

    The weight is 815g/28.7oz according to Sigma web site.

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

      they must have changed it – I will update my post

    • Otus55

      1.8 pounds for Sigma 50mm and Otus 55 is 2.2 pounds.

  • Nikon User

    Funny this premium lens costs $945 while the new Nikon 18-300 costs almost $900.

    That’s why Sigma is so successful.

  • Royl

    The problem for Sigma is that all the 50mm choices are from very good the great. And most of them cost a lot less. Then again, I suppose at least one someone bought an Otus. I can’t see much of a market for a heavy $1000 50mm lens.

  • Anónimo

    Sigma own site indicates a weight of 815 gr that is almost the double of the on in the above table (470 gr).
    Even being lighter than the Zeiss Otus is still far away from the weight we’ve in mind when we think of a 50mm prime.

  • Steve

    … and Nikon wants $900 for consumer grade F/6.3 kit lens.

  • Andrei C

    What is going on? This lens(50 1.4) shoudn’t be less expensive than the Sigma 35 1.4..??
    So if the Sigma 35 1.4 is 899$ and the Sigma 50 1.4 is 949$ then a Sigma 135 f2 OS will be even more expensive ??? 1600$???….. Well can’t wait :D….actually not really……to expensive for me :(.

    • Sashimi

      Sigma is nikonizing its prices. Damn :/

      • Andrei C

        Yes they seem to forget they are named Sigma and not Canikon……Zeiss…..:)

      • Spy Black

        Except they’re giving you exceptional lenses for that money, unlike Nikon.

    • Chris

      Why should it be less expensive??? Doesn’t this have MORE elements and groups??? It’s in a league of it’s own and completely reasonable in price. Nikon users don’t even have a high end 50mm unless we consider the 58mm which this is far cheeper than. Think about it!

      • Andrei C

        From my experience with Sigma: my 17-50 2.8 OS had problems with autofocus which stopped working from time to time, my first 85 1.4 came broken from the store(exchanged
        it for Nikon 85 1.4), one of my friends has a Sigma 85 1.4 and autofocus failed to work just after a few hundred of shots, another one has 2 Sigma 17-50
        both are barely working after one year(the glass is moving inside one of the lenses…)….another one has problems with autofocus on 70-200 OS which failed
        after two years……
        So because I don’t know how autofocus will work in 5 years , or if the lens will fall into pieces in a couple of years I’m just saying the prices are just way to high.
        If you buy a Canon or a Nikon you know what to expect, you know the Canikon lenses will work very well many years from now, but with Sigma younever know, plus in my country Sigma has 2 years warranty and Nikon has 3 years warranty.
        So in my opinion Sigma lenses are to expensive at this moment.

        • hussey

          Yeah, I’m kinda thinking that Sigma is reading all of the hype that we’re spewing out all over the web, and pricing accordingly. I’m guessing they’re overcharging by $100 or even $200 from what they could’ve.

    • hussey

      Correcting at 50mm is more complicated apparently. The zeiss 135 is the new gold standard for lenses, and it is $2199. If you think of it has about half the Otus, then the new sigma 135 should be about $599, right? Hopefully!

    • simba

      The Sigma 50mm f/1.4 is heavier than the 35mm. It probably has more glass and is more costly to make.

  • broxibear

    Looks like a nice lens, such a personal thing if you’re willing to pay that type of money for any lens, especially when there’s so much choice.
    £850 in the UK, £1450 for Nikon’s 58mm…I’d love to know how much profit they actually make on these lenses.

  • Saffron Blaze

    I hope Sigma made a large production run before announcing that price.

  • Mansgame

    The $400 Nikkor 50mm 1.4G can do 99% of what this lens can do , it can fit in your coat pocket in case you need f/1.4, and it’s a real Nikon and not a Siggy that will not have much resell value. You who keep praising these overpriced oversized lenses better put your money where your mouths are.

    • Chris

      The 50 1.4G is a cheap lens, built like a toy and doesn’t even have nikons top of the line achievements built in. Where is the Nano Crystal Coat??? The resell value of the 50 1.4G is horrible and for me the 50 1.8G actually outperformed my 1.4 so in theory why buy the 1.4 at all??? Again… compare this lens to the 58mm when we are talking price and features instead of using a cheap toy in comparison.

    • Theodoros Fotometria

      Actually, if we count 17% for each aperture stop up to f8 (where diffraction begins), the Nikkor can only do 50% of what the Art can…. Now if we add the importance of paying for faster aperture… the balance may equal the weight difference in favour of the Sigma….

  • Saffron Blaze

    The closer you get to perfection cost rises almost exponentially. It is a concept I am comfortable with. If this lens is as good as the Otus then it should be considered a bargain at 1/4 the price.

    • hussey

      Yes, look at the sports cars that can go 200mph compared to 160mph. Is that worth an extra $200,000 or more?

      • Ducktape

        When you’re a nascar driver, yes.

        • Sundra Tanakoh

          Sports cars are not NASCARs and out on the road there is something called a speed limit. 55 in a vw is still 55 in a Lotus and you still get there in the same amount of time.

          • Saffron Blaze

            But the one sitting next to you in the VW is likely to be relatively ugly, as compared to the one in the Lotus.

            :P

      • Saffron Blaze

        Yes :-)

  • Joe

    Nice… but not my cup of tea. The idea of a 50mm for me is to have a small, lightweight and unobstrusive lens, which this is not. Also my AF-S 50/1.4G is acceptably good at f/2 (I almost never use 1.4) and excellent at f/4-f/5.6. Have fun, I’ll pass. :-)

    • rafakoy

      True, and I own several 50mm lenses, but there are people who uses/need lenses wide open and in those cases this one comes handy. I do a lot of street photography at night, sometimes very very dark and my current Nikkor AF 50mm f/1.4D is just not there, so I push the D800 high ISO in those cases but not matter how good the D800 is at high ISO, it will always be better to have a fast lens for those extreme cases.
      A lot of people have expensive lenses. I have the 24-70mm f/2.8 that I paid 2k for it (awesome lens BTW) so, $970 is not that bad if you think about it. I use 50mm 90% of the time, in my case it’s worth it.

    • Theodoros Fotometria

      That is a respectful position… different than mine, but well supported.

    • Cos

      Nikon 50mm 1.4G has very bad CA performance and poor microcontrast. However, you are right it is quite sharp from f2.

  • http://www.gradyphoto.com/ Pete Grady

    I’m sure that the pixel peepers would find this lens to be superior, but for 98% of applications and 100% of time viewed at normal distances, my $100 50mm f/1.8 is pretty fantastic.

    • iamlucky13

      Don’t sweat your 50 F/1.8. It’s a very good lens for just about everything except shooting wide open at bright points.

      The MTF charts actually are not too different between this Sigma and the 50 F/1.8G, but of course, the Sigma is at F/1.4, and the Nikon drops off a little more in the extreme corners. Stopped down, especially on a crop sensor camera, I’d doubt you’d see much difference.

      The charts do suggest an edge over the 50 F/1.4G at the same aperture.

      But it’s competitor is not really the 50 F/1.4G, which makes sacrifices wide open to keep cost and size down. It would compete instead with the 58 F/1.4G and the Zeiss lenses.

      Compared to the 58 F/1.4G, the charts suggest the Sigma will be sharper in the center, but the Nikon would look better in the corners and be more consistent across the full frame. If I understand the subtleties of MTF charts right, the Nikon would also be less likely to show coma (one of the most lauded traits of the old Noct Nikkor (night) lens it is molded after…a lens that still often sells for $3000 used!).

  • Anyone asking why this lens is 950 dollars doesn’t need and shouldn’t buy this lens.

  • lord eels

    it’s a giant generic lens that’s about 2x overpriced, at a worthless focal length. furthermore, get it with the USB Dock, you will CERTAINLY need it considering sigma AF.

    • umeshrw

      And he is back in all his glory…..

  • doge

    The haters are out today.

    • TeaBreak

      Sigma is to blame. They have disappointed generations of photographers with really bad lenses and even worst lens service. This stays in our mind.

      • doge

        They haven’t disappointed me yet. I’m loving all my Sigma glass.

        • Nikon User

          When Nikon switches off support for all Sigma lenses, we will be disappointed.

      • Theodoros Fotometria

        So has Nikon… (and lots of others) in lots of cases… still remember the 43-86mm f3.5 from the 80’s… didn’t expect that it would have more to come! Anybody remembers the first AF series?

      • Chris

        Tons of epic photographers have been rocking the previous line of lenses from Sigma such as the 50mm 1.4 and 85mm 1.4 and they enjoy those far more than the Nikon ones. Sam Hurd comes to mind as a person who rocks Sigma and he puts us to shame. I’m still a little salty from a crappy Nikon 28mm 1.8 I got that couldn’t lock focus on anything beyond 30 feet. Thankfully the 3rd copy I received works well :)

    • Theodoros Fotometria

      Well… they won’t be able to stop the success or the ART thrill developing…

  • WhoSaidPlastic

    It shouldn’t be made of plastic for 815 grams

  • NotWorth$1K

    Actually the MTF is not as good as expected.
    Awaiting DxO BS between this lens and the Zeiss Otus.

    • http://www.gradyphoto.com/ Pete Grady

      Or, you could look at actual photographs…that would be novel.

      • Sundra Tanakoh

        You mean ….actually go outside and actually use a camera? WTH is wrong with you?

  • BM

    Does this come with a cervical collar for Wimps like me? That is one heavy Mo-Fo.

    • Neopulse

      Use a diagonal strap.

  • AM I Am

    I just kind of wonder why all those Sigma fanboys don’t start pushing Sigma to build bodies to go with their fArt series lenses.
    If Sigma really listens and they are so good, they might even build the D300s and D700 replacements so many are looking for.

    • hussey

      You haven’t been reading enough about them then. They ARE pushing new bodies! But sigma has shot that down for awhile, in their corporate postings, so they’re quiet again.

      • AM I Am

        So, does Sigma have the D300s and D700 replacements?

        • hussey

          Corporate made it sound like they won’t have much in the way of any new dslrs for the foreseeable future. But I can’t say I’ve looked into too hard, or paid too much attention to any of it. My guess is they know there’s just not too much money in that market now.

  • http://www.gradyphoto.com/ Pete Grady

    Would love to see some examples shot by someone who knows how to make a photograph properly.

  • Aldo

    Almost 1000 dollars for a 50mm… makes me love my “low end…horrible.. blurry” 1.8g

  • Aldo

    Almost 1000 dollars for a 50mm… makes me love my “low end…horrible.. blurry” 1.8g

    • AM I Am

      Exactly, is this Sigma 5 times better than the 1.8g? I bet it’s not.

      • Spy Black

        Wide open it will be. That’s what this lens is all about.

  • bgbs

    This lens looks gorgeous

  • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

    Um, I quote LensTip: “It is nothing to be proud of but, in order to defend the Nikkor a bit,
    we can say that the more expensive Zeiss Otus didn’t correct the coma in
    a perfect way either.”

    …if you compare the images, they’re about the same. Sure the Otus is higher resolution, but also twice the price and no AF.

  • Www

    If I have to look up charts and reviews to tell me if my images are sharp enough or not as good as they can be then the different is irrelevent

  • Cry cry.
    If you have a 50mm, and don’t feel like upgrading, then don’t!
    If you don’t currently own a 50, this is the one to get!
    If you’re on then fence due to the cost, then don’t buy it!
    If you need ultimate sharpness, get the Zeiss 55mm!

    Why must people bicker back and forth, when the solutions are all very logical!?

    • http://www.gradyphoto.com/ Pete Grady

      I can give you 4,000 reasons why the Zeiss isn’t my first choice. If I didn’t own a 50mm lens already, it wouldn’t be as cut and dry as you make it in deciding which lens to get. You act like $4,0000 is inconsequential. Well, it’s not that simple for most people.

      • But… but…
        It is f’n cut and dry!

        You don’t have 4000 dollars to spend on the Zeiss, so you get a wonderful Sigma option for 950!

        Or, you keep the 50 you have, and don’t complain when you see options you can’t afford.
        I LITERALLY listed the options!

        • http://www.gradyphoto.com/ Pete Grady

          You said…”If you don’t currently own a 50, this is the one to get!” So, OK, I’ll give you 950 reasons I wouldn’t/couldn’t get this to be the 50mm lens in my bag.

          • Right, so you have no money to buy a new lens.
            No cry for you then. Bye bye.

        • Manvin

          I think sigma and samyang both are good as carl zesiss for much less pricing

          No points to spend 4k to see minor difference between those brands.

          • Cos

            No, they are not. Try to shoot good Zeiss glass and you will se the difference.

            • Manvin

              yes you are right, but again if you upload to either youtube or viemo – you still loose original quality

    • AM I Am

      A 24-85mm kit lens or Uncle Bob’s 28-300mm cover the 50mm focal length too, would they count?

  • KnightPhoto

    Just an observation that all these camera companies are in trouble if they don’t/can’t make a profit on their products, It’s a global trend, the smartphone wars have to be a concerning trend to all of these companies. Not to mention stiff competition from your competitors no matter who you are. And then layer in fewer paid professionals from days of yore. Bit of a perfect storm, and then we’ve got Apple making a move on photography yet to come.

    As far as the lens itself, I did notice the price, weight, and MTF right way. I own the current Sigma 50mm, and do have some memorable and important shots with it. Getting out there with a 50 can definitely be fun.

  • FredBear

    Providing one doesn’t need D1.4, considering the weight of this lens, one wonders if the Nikon 24-70 might be a better option for 50 mm.
    Looking at the MTF figures for the Nikon (only wide and tele available on their site) there might not be any relevant difference at 50mm.
    There’s little weight difference between the two (815 vs 900 grams).
    Although the Nikon is twice the price one gets the added versatility.

    • Cos

      Nikon 24-70 has serious problems with CA which makes it unusable on many occasions. There is no indication so far that new Sigma 50mm art lens will be much better with this regard. BTW, Nikon 50mm 1.4G also has problems with CA. I am using now Sigma 35mm 1.4 art which has almost no CA (I am sooting D800e).

      • FredBear

        A new 24-70 is long overdue. Perhaps they can sort out the CA?
        I normally shoot primes but a nice wide/standard zoom would go down quite nicely in my arsenal – I’ve been looking but can’t find anything suitable other than the Nikon 24-70 but don’t want to invest in this lens if it might be revised in the not too distant future.

        • Cos

          I have tested the last version of Nikon 24-70. BTW, Sigma might bring a new 24-70 on the market as well.

  • Me Meses

    Say you want a 50mm lens (or a 35mm) for your D800, say you want reasonably high quality but 950 dollars is the very upmost maximum you will struggle with, and say you want it to AF and the rest of the stuff and say you want it to offer you a wider range than your 70-200mm, which lens would you chose?

    • AM I Am

      Nikkor AF-S FX 35mm f/1.8g and Nikkor AF-S 50mm f/1.8g. You can get both for $820.
      If you want to go even wider, you can replace the 35mm with the 28mm. 28mm + 50mm for same $820.

  • Jianwei Xu

    It’s a good business model to sell only lens. When you make a good lens, like 35mm 1.4A, you can sell to Nikon, Canon, Sony etc bodies with minor modification at the mount. You are targeting the whole photography community. Nikon has a great 14-24 lens, but they can’t sell it to Canon users. But if sigma has it, they can sell it to anybody. I believe you guys now see this is a very good strategy.

  • Aldo

    yeah for those of us who are budget conscious it is better to invest this kind of money in another lens or just keep it in our pockets.

  • Laura Richardson

    Amazon just updated the delivery date for my pre-ordered Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art for Nikon…”Sigma 311306 50mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Lens for Nikon Cameras” Estimated arrival date: May 12, 2014 – June 04, 2014

  • Back to top