One of the most amazing lenses you can get for your Sony A-mount (or E-mount via adapter) is certainly the 50mm f/1.4 Sigma ART lens. The lens now got reviewed by Kai from Digitalrev (video on top) and by Gordon from Cameralabs who writes:
The new Sigma 50mm f1.4 ART is a truly excellent lens which comfortably out-performs anything costing even twice the price. It sets a new standard for 50mm lenses and easily earns our Highly Recommended award.
The A-mount lens can be preordered in USA Amazon (Click here) at BHphoto (Click here) and Adorama (Click here). And in Europe at WexUK (Click here) and WexDe (Click here).
0 Responses
You get what you pay for. There are no shortcuts when it comes to optics and this review nails it. The sigma used more elements while making more optical corrections to achieve its wide open sharpness. What it lacks therefore is good bokeh and better contrast.
If I were to get a new 50mm I’d be a Zeiss. Its weather sealed, has a SSM, and is 100% future proof with Sony’s new AF system.
I have it- and it is fantastic. I owned the older one and can say there is a very noticeable improvement. What I like best is the contrast and bokeh wide open. Same qualities I like on my 135mm 1.8. You can get it for 1200-1300 used now in mint condition. It is expensive for what it is- I can’t deny that. But, when I now look at some of the newer competing 50’s on the market, I think it’s worth the few extra hundred over them for the build, SSM and most importantly- rendering.
You mean 100% future proof on the mount that has never had a serious camera or any decent camera launch in recent times and is about to go belly up? 🙂
I wouldn’t be so hard on Sony’s e-mount line-up. They don’t suck quite that much and will get better with time as they mature. ;^)
You really do live in the opposite world!
Seriously what is the use of having a 50mm lens if you don’t get good Bokeh? If you’re looking for a sharp portrait lens you would be better served by some nice fast zoom lens like the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 or similar lenses.
On the other hand if you’re looking for the specific 50mm look you better invest in a lens with good Bokeh, or maybe even choose some nice old film camera with solid prime lenses.
This review really sucks or more accurately Kai really sucks in this review. ;^)
I’m certainly not interested in a 50mm Sigma anything. The current Sony model (non-Zeiss) perfoms incredibly well (and its also a third of the weight, and very compact). Its also 100% AF-D compatible, and possesses the vivid Minolta “Blue” color rendition.
Why spend a one thousand dollars to get a negligable increase inperformance. Especially one that won’t retain its value, and will probably fall apart two seconds after its warranty.
It makes more sense to use that money to buy another lens (in a different focal length of course like a Zeiss 24mm or second hand 85mm Minolta G), or perhaps a new body like the A77II.
I had the Sony regular 50mm lens and it was never really sharp unless you were shooting a close up portrait. None of the more open portraits that I shot was really sharp when viewed up close and had to use a lot of Photoshop tricks to prepare for printing (and still made fun of by the printing guy). The Zeiss lens on the other hand provides such sharp photos that a lot of the times I don’t even need to do ANY sharpening in Lightroom or Photoshop, it’s already looking seriously good, right out of the camera.
I used to own the Sony 50 1.4 and it was very good stopped down a bit, but it really shows its age against more modern lenses when used wide open. I used to avoid any aperture larger than f/2.
I’ll do you one even better. Yesterday I coincidentally bought a ~30 year old Minolta f/1.7 off of FleaBay for the real Minolta colors! It’s a crossed x beauty that set me back a whole $40 shipped.
“Why spend a one thousand dollars to get a negligable increase inperformance. ”
It’s negligible to those who don’t know what to look for. It matters to those who want the best.
“or perhaps a new body like the A77II.”
That’s the same kind of bad taste I was talking about 🙂
How does it compare to fe 55 1.8 and 50 1.4 A mount Sony Zeiss?
– the Sigma’s Bokeh is worse
– the Sigma is notweatherproof
– the Sigma is super big and heavy
– the Zeiss colors are more saturated and contrast better
I would never consider it for the A7 over the FE55 for size and weight reasons. For the A99 maybe as it is cheaper, but check the rendering first. For me rendering is more important than sharpness.
I was planning to get the A-Mount Sony Zeiss 50mm 1.4 for my A7 because I plan on adapting it to the new A-mount camera that might be coming out. So….with what you already said, how would the Zeiss 50 compare to the Zeiss 55?
My personal preference is Zeiss 50. The microcontrast, color, bokeh is subjectively better.
Compared to sigma. I don’t know about Zeiss 55
microcontrast and colour aren’t subjective things. bokeh however is.
The FE 55 is no slouch with regard to sharpness, but rendering is the key here, isn’t it?
There really is something about the FE 55’s rendering that really stands out. I don’t see that on the Sigma.
It’s a similar story with the FE 35 – it has great rendering and that famous Zeiss pop. It’s not amazingly sharp wide open (the corners are especially poor if you have the pixel peeping disease), but I’ve really fallen in love with the images it produces.
I my opinion the 55 FE is as good as the Otus and the Sigma..Haven’t used the 50 A-mount. But the 55 FE is called the “Otus light” for a reason. It’s an outstanding sharp lens.
The Sigma has weak bokeh. I agree. But it trounces everything else in all other categories. Namely distortion! Sharpness. It’s a more modern lens. But I still prefer the 50/1.2 and the 55FE
rofl what on earth is “weak bokeh”? What doesn’t it hold up?
The weakness with many, else excellent, Sigma Art lenses is weight and size. I am extremely content with the FE 55/1.8. It has the same optical performance and is considerably smaller and lighter. Price is similar. After all the Sigma is 1.4, not 1.2.
Oh yeah totally agree. The 55mm FE is an awesome lens. have used the 55 FE and the Otus and the Sigma. I would always reach for the 55 FE no question.
That’s a perspective coming from a mount and body size where the Sigma is not aimed at.
That being said, all other 50s before the Otus and the Siggy are considerably smaller (except maybe the 50mm 1.4 ZA A mount) but for those who want superior performance…size could be a distant third.
Remember it’s a dslr lens and not a mirrorless lens, so the size isn’t that bad. Given the outstanding 55/1.8, I can’t see how this is of much interest to the e-mount crowd…
Such a light weight useless review !!!!
Personally I’d be more interested in a rework of their 12-24 with the same priorities (sharpness over everything else). Something like a 12-18. Doesn’t sound like a lot of zoom range but it’s still a FOV range of more than 22 deg (for comparison, the classical SLR 35-70mm has a FOV range of about 25 deg). That would also include the exotic 12mm that none of the major manufacturers cover (for FF SLRs).
I have to admit, I do admire Sigma for pushing the boundaries. I find it funny how people will always nit pick at anything to down one product over the other. I am with the people that likes rendering over sharp images…but I wouldn’t constantly bash the Siggy 50mm as to defiantly polish the Otus’ name.
Yes, the Otus is better…but how much more money better? Maybe someone looking at this would say “but the Otus is MF only and I don’t like MF” and the Siggy, with its “flaws” becomes the better buy.
Good for Zeiss. They still make the best 50mm and it is still cheaper than Leica’s supposedly best-ever 50mm summi-apo-cron-lux-$$$$
Good for Siggy…as always, offering great value for money. Who can deny that?
This lens will anyways be a run away success in a similar fashion as the 35mm 1.4 ART and the 18-35mm 1.8.
The Otus 55 isn’t better… the Sigma has better CA correction.
What a pointless review. What about throwing in the ZA50 as well and make it complete and a little more serious.
Judging lenses with ice creams held by somebody that’s moving around, while Kai’s moving taking pics in a closed environment with little light? o.O
I’d be interested to see how they compare too…
“…comfortably out-performs anything…”
Aren’t generalizations great?
They give whats needed to those who need them the most.
Hi Andrea – any news on when they’re releasing the USB dock for a-mount? Judging by the amount of micro adjustment my 35/1.4 needs on my A77ii, I don’t think their factory calibration has improved much…
To answer my own question Sigma UK has had the dock in stock since April, so I’ve got no idea why it’s not available online yet…
lol none of them compares to the Mighty 55 f1.8 Carl Zeiss lens. it has the best bokeh and sharpness at wide open aperture!
Carl Zeiss > Nikkor lens, L lens, G lens, Art lens
So mighty! A giant among lenses! It blows everything else out of the water! Like Godizilla! What a mighty monster lens! The best of the best of the best! Mighty Karl Zeiss! It’s better at 1.8 than everything else at 8.1! Think about it!
I think you’ve mixed up the meanings of the signs.
Not compared to SonyZeiss 50 1.4 – sad
The Zeiss on my Sony HX400V at 50mm is much superior to everything too!
And it easily earns my highly recommended award too. I know my stuff because I love ice cream and I have used Lotus and Hazelblood and every (so-called!) pro Nikon brick and Canon brick and all the overpriced Leica richboy toys without AF (!!!!). Sony is generations ahead. But who am I telling, everybody on this website knows that Sony is best and just awesomish cool!
Kai isn’t able to make a review of anything including his head so why are you advertising this guy?.
This was a poorly done review, even by Digital Rev standards. I had the chance to compare the Sigma on a 5DM3 vs. my a99 and the SAL5014Z, and while I give a slight edge in sharpness to the Sigma, the Sony focuses faster, has slightly better colors, is slightly brighter (better effective T-value), and much nicer bokeh. If I were on a budget, I’d definitely get the Sigma, as it’s still an amazing lens. But I’m not trading in my Sony just yet.
Too big and heavy. That Siggy is silly big for a 50/1.4. Better off with the FE 55/1.8.