The extreme lensquality of the 50mm Sigma Art lens

[kers]

Since a week i have the Sigma Art 50mm on my d800E and I can already say that it is the best lens i have ever had.
Nothing new here since Roger Cicala made the measurements and compared the lens with the best Leica lenses.
 (  http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014/06/comparing-rangefinder-and-slr-50mm-lenses-version-0-7  )

Because i have a V1 camera i can make the quality more visible.

Here two center image examples made from the same standpoint ( tripod) with the d800e and the V1+Ft1connector and the Sigma.
The V1 is a 10megapixel camera and has a tiny sensor that would compare to a 100+ megapixel fullframe sensor.
It shows the lens is well up to a full frame 100MPl sensor.
(I enlarged the d800e image to fit the V1 image)

[kers]

In succession i made an other comparison...

According to lensrentals measurements  :

Sigma art 50mm   f1,4       1248 linepairs/mm in the center
Sigma art 50mm   f2          1200 linepairs/mm at the edge

on the picture
LEFT   d800e at about its best quality :   center at f2,8        I have enlarged the photo to be in equal size with a 100% slice from the V1 image
RIGHT V1 its worst quality :                   center at f 1,4      (with the V1 the whole image is center, due to its small sensor)
compare  the measurement with the photo's...

The V1 image represents the quality of the center of the Sigma at f1,4 and the edge at d2. the quality might reasonably become better at smaller apertures;
The d800e on the other hand shows its best possible quality...

[NancyP]

Tantalizing. I am curious to see the lens in person, but the lens supply currently is backlogged.

[BernardLanguillier]

They have 17 copies in stock at Amazon jp in Nikon mount.

Either they have interational stock mgt issues, or the Japanese customers aren't that interested in sharpness.

Cheers,
Bernard

[eronald]

They have 17 copies in stock at Amazon jp in Nikon mount.

Either they have interational stock mgt issues, or the Japanese customers aren't that interested in sharpness.

Cheers,
Bernard

Isn't the newish Sony Zeiss 50 also a cheap member of the "superlens club"?

Edmund

[bjanes]

In succession i made an other comparison...

According to lensrentals measurements  :

Sigma art 50mm   f1,4       1248 linepairs/mm in the center
Sigma art 50mm   f2          1200 linepairs/mm at the edge

Those resolution figures are unreasonably high. On checking the article you referenced, I see that they are lp/ph, where ph is the picture height, which is 24 mm for a 35 mm style sensor.

Bill

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Those resolution figures are unreasonably high. On checking the article you referenced, I see that they are lp/ph, where ph is the picture height, which is 24 mm for a 35 mm style sensor.

Bill is correct, LP/PH. Also important to keep in mind is that these are optical bench measurements of only the lens. So in a direct comparison between lenses tested the same way, that's fine. But it doesn't tell the whole story of how that works out on a given sensor, after having to pass through several additional optical layers (IR filter, Low-pass filter or modified OLPF, sensor coverglass) before being averaged over the sensel's aperture / mask, and before demosaicing.

The Sigma 50mm Art results that Pieter posted look very interesting, although I'm not so sure about the sharpening that was used.

Cheers,
Bart

[eronald]

Bill is correct, LP/PH. Also important to keep in mind is that these are optical bench measurements of only the lens. So in a direct comparison between lenses tested the same way, that's fine. But it doesn't tell the whole story of how that works out on a given sensor, after having to pass through several additional optical layers (IR filter, Low-pass filter or modified OLPF, sensor coverglass) before being averaged over the sensel's aperture / mask, and before demosaicing.

The Sigma 50mm Art results that Pieter posted look very interesting, although I'm not so sure about the sharpening that was used.

Cheers,
Bart

Some years ago I went to see Norman in his old Imatest offices with my D3x and brand new "new" version Nikon 85/1.4; out of courtesy, he set up and tested the combination, and we found out that the lens completely outresolved the sensor, giving almost uniform resolution test  results across the field, a configuration he had not seen before at that point in time - the best test results he had ever seen on a 35mm camera as he put it.

I guess if a lens is really a superlens, designed to last a few years in spite of creeping resolution sensor increases, then you need an optical bench to test it, or a special instrument-camera with a purpose-assembled measurement sensor which I assume the big corporations do manufacture in their production tooling department and employ both in their labs and on the line.

I think slanted edge software does very well as a QC tool for those billions of camera phones that roll of the production lines

Edmund

[bjanes]

The Sigma 50mm Art results that Pieter posted look very interesting, although I'm not so sure about the sharpening that was used.

Bart,

Sharpening, or lack thereof, confounds the results of a slanted edge analysis of resolution. Is sharpening involved in optical bench analysis?

Bill

[David Anderson]

the Sigma Art 50mm on my d800E

This rash of new super 50 ish lenses reminds me of that old mens room sign 'Why piss on the floor - be a hero and sh*t on the ceiling'.
While I will admit to occasionally using standard lenses and feel they have a place, isn't the world more in need of a super 24 or maybe a 20 ?

[Colorado David]

. . . isn't the world more in need of a super 24 or maybe a 20 ?

I intend to watch the reaction to this lens for a time and then buy one for stitching panos.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Sharpening, or lack thereof, confounds the results of a slanted edge analysis of resolution. Is sharpening involved in optical bench analysis?

Hi Bill,

No sharpening, but my sharpening comment was about the image crops that Pieter posted in the first post of this thread. I should have been more clear about that.

Optical bench measurements are measurements of the analog optical image in air in the focal plane. No camera can be used there, and no sharpening is possible until an image is recorded/quantized. There is only light. So we are looking at the measurements of contrast reduction due to optics alone, the image that gets projected on the sensor.

Cheers,
Bart

[Petrus]

I intend to watch the reaction to this lens for a time

I have had it for a week: the sharpness is unreal. At full open it is as good as almost anything at f/8… I have shot close portraits and the autofocus is just on the iris without any calibration with my D800e. I have started shooting everything with it, full open...

[Colorado David]

Thank you, Petrus.

[Telecaster]

While I will admit to occasionally using standard lenses and feel they have a place, isn't the world more in need of a super 24 or maybe a 20 ?

Depends on the world you inhabit.     I grew up using rangefinder cameras and am still pretty much a 28–90mm guy. Anything wider than 24/25mm is a special effects lens to me. I own some and even use 'em every so often, but I don't see all that well with 'em. OTOH I've never met a 50mm I haven't liked.

Re. Edmund's mention of the Zeiss/Sony FE 55/1.8...I own one and it is indeed impressive. No idea what its lp/ph figures are but pics I've taken with it (on an A7r) have a lovely clarity to them. OOF character is nice too.

-Dave-

[EgillBjarki]

Re. Edmund's mention of the Zeiss/Sony FE 55/1.8...I own one and it is indeed impressive. No idea what its lp/ph figures are but pics I've taken with it (on an A7r) have a lovely clarity to them. OOF character is nice too.
-Dave-

I agree with David, the 55mm is very sharp!

[kers]

@ everybody
Thank you for your contributions and pointing out my mistakes…
I always do some testing of my equipment and you have to do it right or not do it: it takes some time and effort to get it right.

Also in this case; if you slightly miss the optimal focus at wide apertures you loose all the reasons to spend more money on the better lens. So the weakest link is still the photographer or the autofocus system.


@ Bernard
“Either they have interational stock mgt issues, or the Japanese customers aren't that interested in sharpness.... ”

True, sharpness is only part of the quality, but i must say the Sigma has a very nice bokeh, faster autofocus than any of the 50-58mm Nikkors and very good flare resistance, almost no distortion, flat field of sharpness, very well built.
I can only complain about the short focus throw - would like that to be about 360 degrees but I guess the autofocus is limiting that..
Also i am still waiting for the USB-dock tot see how the autofocus will behave. It behaves different than the nikkors - for instance it does not work well electronically ( as you can do in control pro/ helicon focus remote);
I mean auto focusworks but shifting the focus electronically does not.


I have owned the 1,4G 50mm , 1,8G 50mm nikkors and tested a week the 58mm 1,4 G.
My conclusion is the 1,4G nikkor is hazy at 1,4 and slow autofocus. So you miss the action…
The 1,8G is better wide open and has decent autofocus. It is small and 600 grams lighter than the Sigma so i will keep it.
It never gets really sharp in the extreme corners…
The 58mm has a superb flare resistant coating and nice rendering but slow autofocus and while delevering a clear image wide open it is not sharp in the center and not sharp in the corner at 5,6 … The lens behaviour is puzzling- it has a steep learning curve ( like the 24PCE, and one is enough)
What is missing in their lineup is a lens like Sigma has made today.



@ Bll Bjanes
“Those resolution figures are unreasonably high…”

you are so right; i made a mistake…
More than one
the V1 represents about 74MP not over 100… I was mistaken with the V2
Would like to try a v3 on it but … tooo expensive… ( represents a FFsensor of 136MP)



@ Bart van der Wolf
“The Sigma 50mm Art results that Pieter posted look very interesting, although I'm not so sure about the sharpening that was used…”

I used ACR with my own optimal outcome in both cases and some additional sharpening in photoshop.
That said : I don not think this difference can be bridged with different sharpening



@ David Anderson
“isn't the world more in need of a super 24 or maybe a 20 ?”

off topic but..
I very much like the 24mm 1,4G Nikkor.  Sharp in the center from 1,4 (autofocusses well after you adjusted the AF in the body); extreme corners still need d8


@ Colorado David
“I intend to watch the reaction to this lens for a time and then buy one for stitching panos.”

That was also my idea; a basic lens for these things and for dark situations. F5.6 is top.

@EgillBjarki
The Zeiss/Sony FE 55/1.8 might well be just as good or better - i do not have it...

[kers]

Pixel peeping ….

Here two examples of the centre of the nikon 1,8G 50mm lens  and the Sigma Art 1,4G 50mm
Both shot with the V1 at f1,8  and f2,8 ( from a serie of images the sharpest of both lenses were chosen)




the edge i cannot compare this way.

If you like you can download some d800e nefs from my site shot with both lenses at 1,8  and 5,6.
I leave them there for a week. ( about 200MB)

http://www.beeld.nu/LL/sigma-nikon.zip

cheers…


Now i get on with some (real) work.

PK

[kers]

About the USB dock
Have not tried it yet, but as you can see the bonus of the sigma USB-dock is that you can change the autofocus  at 4 distances
Also you can go to full time manual focus by turning the focus ring ( or not) and select how sensitive you like to have it.

[David Anderson]

Thanks for the raw download Kers, I had a very good look and both images look very impressive.
Side by side, the Sigma looks good value assuming the quality of individual lenses is consistent.

Can't wait till they bring out the 24..