Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM ART Review
The Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM ART is the world's sharpest AF 50mm lens on any camera system. On DSLRs, for optical quality and sharpness, it has no equal. The 50mm focal length is one of the most useful, offering a very "normal" perspective which captures very closely what your eyes see when you are focused on a subject. This is why a 50mm lens is found in most photographers' bags, ranging from beginner right through to seasoned professionals.
The Nikon 50mm f/1.4 has much more distortion, is much less sharp wide open and lacks the contrast and acuity this Sigma can generate. The Canon 50mm f/1.2 L, similarly, whilst being slightly faster, does not hold up as well as the Sigma when performing at wide apertures. Unlike other, cheaper 50mm lenses which suffer from issues such as chromatic aberrations, flare and coma, this premium Sigma's optics and coatings are excellent, also producing great colour and microcontrast. Its construction is also great, feeling similar in quality to Nikon and Canon's professional primes, with mostly metal and some plastic.
For my recommendations on what to get for the Nikon FX system, see my Nikon FX System recommendations. For other reviews of Nikon (and third-party made for Nikon) gear, click to see my list of Nikon System Reviews. To see what's in my current camera collection, click here.
The Nikon 50mm f/1.4 has much more distortion, is much less sharp wide open and lacks the contrast and acuity this Sigma can generate. The Canon 50mm f/1.2 L, similarly, whilst being slightly faster, does not hold up as well as the Sigma when performing at wide apertures. Unlike other, cheaper 50mm lenses which suffer from issues such as chromatic aberrations, flare and coma, this premium Sigma's optics and coatings are excellent, also producing great colour and microcontrast. Its construction is also great, feeling similar in quality to Nikon and Canon's professional primes, with mostly metal and some plastic.
For my recommendations on what to get for the Nikon FX system, see my Nikon FX System recommendations. For other reviews of Nikon (and third-party made for Nikon) gear, click to see my list of Nikon System Reviews. To see what's in my current camera collection, click here.
The Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM ART is one of my favourite lenses of all time. Compared to other excellent offerings from Nikon and Canon, there simply is no competition. Optically, this Sigma is much better, but of course, it weighs and costs much more than both the Canon and Nikon 50mm f/1.4 lenses. Coming in at over $800 (in Australia), it costs twice as much as the Canon and Nikon equivalents. Weighing in at over 800g, it also weighs more than twice as much too.
For most people, any 50mm lens will give excellent results. Even the cheapest 50mm f/1.8 lenses which can be found for close to $100 are great choices for most people to add to their kits. Despite being plastic, they are great for most usage scenarios and most importantly, they're still much sharper than most cheaper 18-55mm kit lenses which often come bundled with lower-end DSLRs.
Why you pay so much for this Sigma is because it allows you to make slightly better images. Personally, I chose to pay for this Sigma and go through the hassle of carrying it around because I love the look it can reproduce. Not only are the images sharper, but they're free from the distortion the Nikon 50mm f/1.4G has, the images have much more contrast, the colours are much more pronounced and rich (probably due to Sigma's coatings) and, most importantly, it doesn't have any of the Nikon's chromatic aberration when shot wide open. Mechanically, it feels much better in the hand than the Nikon 50mm f/1.4G, which feels light and plastic. The Sigma has plenty of metal and feels very hefty and solid.
Where this Sigma ART lens shines is shooting wide open for shallow depth of field. Unlike the Nikon 50mm f/1.4G which is just hazy and unsharp down at f/1.4, this Sigma is tack sharp at its widest aperture, provided you're able to focus correctly with such a shallow depth of field. The images its able to create at f/1.4 both in studio and on location are excellent. For portraits, it's able to isolate the subject from lush backgrounds. Whilst the backgrounds don't have the distinctive creaminess of an 85mm f/1.4 lens, the 50mm perspective often makes for something a little different than the classic 85mm.
For most people, any 50mm lens will give excellent results. Even the cheapest 50mm f/1.8 lenses which can be found for close to $100 are great choices for most people to add to their kits. Despite being plastic, they are great for most usage scenarios and most importantly, they're still much sharper than most cheaper 18-55mm kit lenses which often come bundled with lower-end DSLRs.
Why you pay so much for this Sigma is because it allows you to make slightly better images. Personally, I chose to pay for this Sigma and go through the hassle of carrying it around because I love the look it can reproduce. Not only are the images sharper, but they're free from the distortion the Nikon 50mm f/1.4G has, the images have much more contrast, the colours are much more pronounced and rich (probably due to Sigma's coatings) and, most importantly, it doesn't have any of the Nikon's chromatic aberration when shot wide open. Mechanically, it feels much better in the hand than the Nikon 50mm f/1.4G, which feels light and plastic. The Sigma has plenty of metal and feels very hefty and solid.
Where this Sigma ART lens shines is shooting wide open for shallow depth of field. Unlike the Nikon 50mm f/1.4G which is just hazy and unsharp down at f/1.4, this Sigma is tack sharp at its widest aperture, provided you're able to focus correctly with such a shallow depth of field. The images its able to create at f/1.4 both in studio and on location are excellent. For portraits, it's able to isolate the subject from lush backgrounds. Whilst the backgrounds don't have the distinctive creaminess of an 85mm f/1.4 lens, the 50mm perspective often makes for something a little different than the classic 85mm.
In the box, it comes with everything a lens like this should, including front and rear Sigma branded caps, a nice lens hood and a very good quality padded soft case which will actually protect it when it's shipping or stored. It actually dampens the lens against vibrations and rough handling, unlike thin pouches which only prevent lenses from getting scuffed and scratched. The box is nice, but really though, it's just a box.
How I Use This Lens
This lens is generally used both in studio and on location. I generally find that 50mm works very well as a walk-around lens. Very rarely do you really need to go longer or wider unless you mostly do landscapes and cityscapes (where you'll probably want something wider) or if you shoot mostly faraway things such as sports (where you'll want something longer). For a general day out, 50mm is perfect.
That said, the aim of such a great lens like this Sigma is so you can shoot wide-open and still have excellent image quality. When used at f/1.4, it allows you to shoot in practically moonlight. On my Nikon D750, I can shoot this lens at f/1.4, ISO12800 and 1/15s, get reasonably sharp shots in light which simply looks like pitch black to my eyes. It's really that amazing, especially combined with today's high ISO cameras. Of course, rarely do we actually need f/1.4 because we're running out of light, more often, it's because we're after smooth, out of focus backgrounds. Thankfully, this Sigma renders bokeh very well, with a pleasing smooth effect and no harsh edges. I'll provide some samples in the section below so you can see what this lens is capable of and why it costs so much more than the Nikon and Canon equivalents.
It's very hard to recommend where you should use a 50mm lens, because unlike specialist lenses such as telephotos and ultra-wides, there's no real special case where a 50mm is always going to be the best option. It's a very generalist lens that works well for a lot of things and deserves a place in the "carry everywhere" bag. There's nothing it can do that other lenses can't do, for example, if you're looking to go low light, f/1.4 is great, but arguably lenses with VR allow you to get shots of stationary things in even lower light and wider angle f/1.4 lenses allow you to use lower shutter speeds. For portraits, it's great, but 85mm if arguably better. What it does do very well though, is be a jack-of-all trades type lens with which you can't go wrong.
That said, the aim of such a great lens like this Sigma is so you can shoot wide-open and still have excellent image quality. When used at f/1.4, it allows you to shoot in practically moonlight. On my Nikon D750, I can shoot this lens at f/1.4, ISO12800 and 1/15s, get reasonably sharp shots in light which simply looks like pitch black to my eyes. It's really that amazing, especially combined with today's high ISO cameras. Of course, rarely do we actually need f/1.4 because we're running out of light, more often, it's because we're after smooth, out of focus backgrounds. Thankfully, this Sigma renders bokeh very well, with a pleasing smooth effect and no harsh edges. I'll provide some samples in the section below so you can see what this lens is capable of and why it costs so much more than the Nikon and Canon equivalents.
It's very hard to recommend where you should use a 50mm lens, because unlike specialist lenses such as telephotos and ultra-wides, there's no real special case where a 50mm is always going to be the best option. It's a very generalist lens that works well for a lot of things and deserves a place in the "carry everywhere" bag. There's nothing it can do that other lenses can't do, for example, if you're looking to go low light, f/1.4 is great, but arguably lenses with VR allow you to get shots of stationary things in even lower light and wider angle f/1.4 lenses allow you to use lower shutter speeds. For portraits, it's great, but 85mm if arguably better. What it does do very well though, is be a jack-of-all trades type lens with which you can't go wrong.
Samples
This lens is insanely sharp, even wide open where most large aperture primes traditionally tended to struggle. I've taken this lens out on a number of assignments and it's always performed considerably well. Given that there are plenty of choices at the 50mm focal length on Nikon, this lens ought to be pretty special to demand such a price premium over the excellent Nikon 50mm f/1.4G. That said, it doesn't disappoint, with colour rendition and contrast being excellent, along with sharpness.
This image (above) was shot wide open, at f/1.4, on the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART. The middle branch closest to me was in focus, the other branches in the background aren't in focus. The visual acuity, contrast and colour in this shot are all amazing. The greens are lush and vibrant, without feeling like they've been artificially saturated and the separation and detail is great. Wide open, it performs remarkably well and as you can see in this picture, it slices the depth of field so razor thin in a way that very few other lenses can. You can use telephotos which might isolate the subject more, but they blow up the background and don't give such a sense of place and presence the way this 50mm does. It has an extremely natural look which feels realistic, unlike wide-angles which tend to be very "in your face" and telephotos, which can feel like tunnel vision.
Stopping down to f/8, it serves very well as a landscape lens. Take a look at the sharpness and detail present in the trees, the amount of detail present in the rocks on the left edge of the frame is also remarkable. Most importantly for landscape shooters, the corners are absolutely tack sharp, taking a look at the trees in the left hand corner, they remain as sharp as the centre of the image. The rocks in the distance are softer because of haze. It wasn't the best day to be taking photos. This lens is remarkably sharp for landscapes and is a fine landscape lens if you like the very natural 50mm focal length. It does, however, lack the immersion many landscapers want for their shots, which can only be served with a wider lens, such as the 16-35mm f/4 VR.
Here are a couple of shots taken indoors, the first with artificial lighting (off-camera strobes) and the second two with just natural lighting. With the artificial lighting, everything looks much sharper because of the harder light. All of these shots were taken at f/1.4 which is remarkable because there are no optical issues such as chromatic aberration, especially on the first image, where you can see absolutely clear and sharp text on the Pepsi can. In the latter two shots, the bokeh is great, with lush, soft out of focus areas and backgrounds that simply just melt away. It's important to remember that if you want really good out of focus areas, get closer, as it shortens your depth of field.
In the last of my teddy shots, you can see how this lens performs under artificial lighting on a subject that actually has texture and detail, unlike a Pepsi can. Teddy's fur is nice and soft, but looks extremely detailed and crisp. The fall off towards the background is nice and separation is great. The way this lens renders the colours is amazing, and the contrast is especially good, which you can see when you look closely at the finer differences between the lighter and darker areas of teddy's fur.
Compared to the Nikon 50mm f/1.8G and f/1.4G
There's no competition. That's not to say that the Sigma is just outright better, but it really depends on what you want out of your lens and what you think would be ideal for you. The Nikon 50mm f/1.8G is a very sharp lens, sharper than even the f/1.4G version. That said, the f/1.4G does have a slightly wider aperture. Both these Nikons are very lightweight, with the f/1.8G version weighing in at around a third of this Sigma and costing around a third as much as well.
Is the Sigma better optically than the Nikon? It most definitely is. It's even much better built and feels much in the hand, but is it worth three times as much as the Nikon 50mm f/1.8G? Well it really depends on you. If you don't have a lot of lenses at the moment and you're looking to acquire a few, save your money, get the 50mm f/1.8G and spend your money on several other lenses that will augment your photography and give you several different options. If you already have all the lenses you want and you're just after better image quality, then sure, by all means, get this Sigma, you'll be very happy with it.
Is the Sigma better optically than the Nikon? It most definitely is. It's even much better built and feels much in the hand, but is it worth three times as much as the Nikon 50mm f/1.8G? Well it really depends on you. If you don't have a lot of lenses at the moment and you're looking to acquire a few, save your money, get the 50mm f/1.8G and spend your money on several other lenses that will augment your photography and give you several different options. If you already have all the lenses you want and you're just after better image quality, then sure, by all means, get this Sigma, you'll be very happy with it.
Compared to the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM ART
The Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM ART is a very good lens. It's the smaller brother to this 50mm ART and it provides the same great image quality in a slightly smaller package. Compared to the 50mm, it's a little cheaper and a little lighter, nothing to really make a difference though. Which of these lenses works better for you really depends on your style of shooting and how you see the world.
I don't have any examples of 35mm vs. 50mm, but there are plenty online. The best way I can describe it is that a 50mm feels like your field of view when your eyes are focused on a subject, you tend to ignore the surroundings a little more, it tends to fill a bit more of your vision. A 35mm is much more of a classic photojournalism lens, which is similar to what your eyes see when you're just casually observing the world without paying attention to any particular subject. It has a much more environmental feel than a 50mm, which isolates the subject that little much more.
My suggestion is to try the lenses and see how you go. Personally, I prefer the 50mm, but I know many people who would rather use a 35mm because of the wider angle of view it is able to offer. It really depends on how you shoot and visualise your shots.
I don't have any examples of 35mm vs. 50mm, but there are plenty online. The best way I can describe it is that a 50mm feels like your field of view when your eyes are focused on a subject, you tend to ignore the surroundings a little more, it tends to fill a bit more of your vision. A 35mm is much more of a classic photojournalism lens, which is similar to what your eyes see when you're just casually observing the world without paying attention to any particular subject. It has a much more environmental feel than a 50mm, which isolates the subject that little much more.
My suggestion is to try the lenses and see how you go. Personally, I prefer the 50mm, but I know many people who would rather use a 35mm because of the wider angle of view it is able to offer. It really depends on how you shoot and visualise your shots.