Battle of the Fast 50mm: Sigma f/1.4 Art vs. Canon f/1.2L vs. Nikon 58mm f/1.4G

DigitalRev Tv review and compare the latest standard prime lens from Sigma, The 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art lens, to it’s Canon and Nikon rivals, the Canon 50mm f/1.2L and Nikon 58mm f/1.4G.

In this video, Digital Rev TV compares the physical differences between the lenses as well as the capabilities of the lenses while shooting wide open; reviewing which lens has the best bokeh and most noticeable vignetting.

[Via YouTube - DigitalRev TV]

Log in or register to post comments

12 Comments

Michael Kormos's picture

You couldn't take my 58mm f/1.4G even from my cold dead hands! It's got - hands down - the creamiest bokeh of ANY lens, old or new. And - unlike Canon's 1.2 fifty, most of the images from Nikon are actually in focus :-)

Pat Black's picture

the 58 is amazing but the creamiest of all maybe not the 200f2 is super creaming amazing because of the compression and the old Trioplan lens, they have amazing bokeh too but in the downside they are all manual, but all that being said the 58 1.4 would def get my money if I shot Nikon

The 50 1.2 is a stunning lens. You do need to have a steady hand to shoot wide open. If you're looking for the easy way out, follow Michael and switch to the 58 1.4. :P

Julien Kauffmann's picture

As a music photographer I will say that the 50 1.2 is useless. The focus is so slow and shitty than the sigma is wayyyyy to far better lens for my use :)

Jason Switzer's picture

This is the kind of info that is useful to me. It's good to hear someone compare the focusing speed of the new Sigma to the 50L. I've heard that the Sigma has difficulty focusing when the outer focus points on a Canon body are used (even the outer cross points on a 5D Mark III). Have you experienced this?

From the images I've seen online, I prefer the Canons more subdued colors, but I do dig the sharpness and contrast from the Sigma (reminds me of the 70-200L 2.8 II). But if the Sigma has problems focusing at different distances, that would be a deal breaker for me.

Julien Kauffmann's picture

When the sigma will sometimes fail to focus, the canon will always. The canon is so sloooooow. I mean. Really. I have never seen any guy in a pit using it. For my 85 I prefered to buy the 1.8 instead of the badass 1.2 just for the focusing speed.

I would love to see the same shot side by side with each of the 3 lenses at the same aperture. My guess is 4/5 photographers couldn't match up all three with their lenses correctly.
I think it's interesting there is a video talking about how the gear doesn't matter right beside one that pixel peeps neigh-on the exact same image to see which lens is infinitely minutely better. Make up your mind.

Elliott Brockelbank's picture

I'm still rocking Sigma's previous iteration of their 50 f/1.4 and am more than pleased with it. Not as sharp as this new one, but the bokeh is a bit creamier and it's just the right size.
That said, I may just have to look into their new 35 f/1.4 and get over how heavy it is.

Heri Rakotomalala's picture

What about the Sony Zeiss 55m f1.8 ?

Jorge Vieira's picture

Finally just received my sigma 50mm 1.4 art in nikon mount. I love it and for the price it is so worth it! its just slightly behind in bokeh but I think the difference in the end is negligible. But i still want the 58 haha!!

First 58mm isnt 50mm.The angle of view is to smal.Second f 1.4 isnt F 1.2 .Third. You cannot have both of twoo worlds. It is one way or the other.You cannot have extreem smoothy bokeh and razor sharp edges at the same time.If you want the best bokeh buy the Canon,it has also very good center sharpness.If you want razorsharp contrastery edges ad 1.4 for night or evening photography buy the sigma.

someone needs a refresher on f-stops. you're right that 58mm and 50mm have different viewing angles. however, in terms of light gathering abilities, 58/1.4 for all intents and purposes is the same as 50/1.2. the diameter of the pupil both come out to roughly 42mm.