Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art lens (Canon version) tested at DxOmark

Sigma-50mm-f1.4-DG-HSM-Art-lens-price-US
DxOMark published their test results for the Canon version of the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art lens ($949):

Sigma 50mm Art vs. Zeiss Otus vs. Zeiss Planar

Sigma-50mm-f1.4-DG-HSM-Art-lens-DxOMark-test

Sigma 50mm Art vs. Sigma 50mm vs. Zeiss Makro-Planar

Sigma-50mm-f1.4-DG-HSM-Art-lens-DxOMark-test-2

Sigma 50mm Art vs. Canon 50mm f/1.2 vs. Canon 50mm f/1.4

Sigma-50mm-f1.4-DG-HSM-Art-lens-DxOMark-test-3
Here are the top ranked 50mm lenses for Canon:

Sigma-50mm-f1.4-DG-HSM-Art-lens-DxOMark-test-4
DxOMark conclusion:

"As part of the company’s new Global Vision Sigma’s reimagining of their premium lenses is reaping dividends. The 50mm f1.4 DG HSM A is every bit as good as the earlier 35mm f1.4 model, in fact it’s slightly better in outright sharpness and uniformity. If there’s a downside it’s that lenses built with few compromises are generally large and heavy, but at least Sigma isn’t making you pay through your wallet. At $949, the new lens isn’t much more expensive than the firm’s high-speed 35mm, and is similarly competitive when compared to rival offerings from the big-brands."

This entry was posted in Canon, Sigma and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Max Barros

    its comparing the 50L @f/1.2 vs the Sigma 50A @f/2… not really a fare comparison.

    • Remedy

      Yeah, You are right… 50L is an utter crap no matter the f-stop so it’s not fair to compare it to anything actually.

      • Alex

        Utter crap??? :) DxOmark scores always remember me of the next dialogue: 1: “I really like this photograph!!!” 2:”Really? WHY?!?!” 1: “It’s so sharp! Even in the corners!”

        • Paul

          funny. “its so sharp even in the corners” true.

    • Nikoolix

      At the right side it says “best at”, not “tested at”. I’m pretty sure this comparison is with all lenses wide open, but they just want to point out it gets better stopped down a bit. :-)

      • El Aura

        Their DxOMark score is not based on absolute lens performance. The lens performance at each f-stop is weighed such that the average score of the average lens is somewhat the same at each f-stop.

        I don’t know the details start with a score at maybe f/4 and then multiply the score reached at f/2.8, f/2, f/1.4 with an increasing factor. In a sense it is like saying, for an f/2 lens the performance of the Sigma is really better than other lenses at f/2, whereas that Sigma advantage at f/1.4 (compared to another 50 mm f/1.x lens) is a bit less. It is asking at which f/stop is this lens the best compared to the average lens.

        I think they also account for focal length (and maybe sensor size). A 50 mm at f/2.8 must probably do better than a 300 mm at f/2.8 lens to get the same score. It’s a nice idea that tries to take out the question at which f-stop (and focal length) the absolute performance of two lenses should be compared. How do you compare a 50 mm f/1.4 lens with a 50 mm f/2.8 macro lens? With their performance at f/2.8 and below? Or how on an absolute scale could these lenses be compared?

        As I said, a nice idea and other lens testers give lenses also absolute grades that take into account how difficult it is to design a lens with a given parameters.

  • ShaoLynx

    Does this render the Otus irrelevant?
    Price/performance wise it seems like a clear choice…
    (Flame comments in 3…2…1…)

    • DuncanM

      Not at all, price/performance ratios only matter to those who care about price.

    • Kynikos

      Strictly based on performance measurables, for my needs this beats the Zeiss. I’ll trade away 1.5 vs. 1.7 T-stop for AF any day of the week.

      • ShaoLynx

        I couldn’t agree more!
        It almost seems too good to be true…

  • Ms.KrystalMeth

    lets see these numbers on a highly rated camera like the Nikon D800…we all know that the Otus scored a 45 with D800. What will the Sigma score on D800…43? Canon your cameras are built like it is 2008.

    • bs detector

      What would you know? you have a D5000 with a kit lens.

      • orpickaname

        And you, a Canon Rebel.

  • Chaitanya

    Lenstip also has posted their review of this lens. They have awarded this lens editors choice award. It looks like Canon and nikon are going to be too late with their update to 50mm lens lineup.

  • Neopulse

    The Otus to me is the high quality lens that’s good for almost anything that draws light into including video.
    The Sigma however is the best value for money especially with it’s modern trimmings like AF and slightly lighter body. Though it sucks that it lacks weather sealing when I don’t think it would’ve made things more difficult in it’s construction.

    • orpickaname

      My conclusion after reading an article somewhere (lensrentals I think) about what manufacturers meant by “weather sealing”: If I were in need of a serious weatherproofing, I’d rent a proper UW housing. :D

      • Neopulse

        Proper weathersealing would be against simple stuff like light rain, humidity, sand being kick up by the wind on a beach or even simple dust that is moved while taking shots in a car out the window. Those kinds of weather sealing are pretty important for normal consumers.

  • knowItAll

    So many 50’ties!! What a waste of human resources…

  • Carlos

    if you’re at about price/performance at that level, you didn’t get it. The Zeiss is the lens, the Sigma a wannabe, pretty good, but second is as irrelevant as 10th.
    and if it’s about price/performance get a Nikon 50 f1.8 and shut up.
    takes great pictures for you, I mean the camera’s brain, does.

    • http://gplimages.com/ TheFantasticG

      Ah, the butthurt is strong with this one.

    • elonex777 .

      But the Sigma has autofocus while the zeiss not. =) And you know i can afford the sigma but i could never ever imagine spend 4000 dollars for a 50mm prime, for a Telephoto lens maybe one day. So with this lens sigma can touch a public who used autofocus and want great lens without spend the price of a flagship DSLR into a prime lens.

  • http://www.flickr.com/photos/kdghantous/ kdghantous

    This lens is absolutely good for photographers. And you know what’s bad for photographers? Those who keep spouting the dogma that one should only use manufacturers’ lenses on their bodies. That not only misleads people, but kills progress.

    • Eric Calabros

      you are absoloutely right; but there is another bad thing for photographers: Pay too much attention to DxO score

      • Shamael

        you should know by experience that the new modern photographer is a clown that shoots only at 250000 – 409000 ISO, needs a 10 to 16 mpix FF chip and chose his lenses by what dxo claims. You have to go forward with this world, my friend. If you don’t you become old fashion, like me and you seem to be right now :-)

  • fjfjjj

    50mm is nicer than 55mm, but 43mm would be nicer.

  • Back to top




// B&H PopView code