The Nikon AF-S 50mm f/1.4 G thread

[Sigur]

I need your help.

I actually wanted to buy a Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4.5 DC Macro HSM for my Nikon D40x but since I'm in the United States and the Dollar is rather weak I got more money than in Germany .

So now I have the possibility to buy a Nikon/Sigma 50mm 1.4 and some kind of standard zoom for example 17-135 with only 1:3.5-5.6 or so.

What would you prefer?

 

[Abstract]

Sigma 50 mm f/1.4.

 

[rogersmj]

I gotta say after more reading that I'm completely torn. I've been awaiting this Nikon 50mm for months, but now that it's out I'm not sure. Since they're the same price it seems to come down to this:

Nikon
Pros: Pretty dang sharp wide open, smaller/lighter than the Sigma
Cons: Not very good bokeh

Sigma
Pros: Creamy bokeh. Creamy bokeh. Creamy bokeh. Really sharp at f/2 and up.
Cons: Slightly soft at f/1.4, but still better than the other 50s it was compared against; larger, heavier.

 

[Sigur]

I gotta say after more reading that I'm completely torn. I've been awaiting this Nikon 50mm for months, but now that it's out I'm not sure. Since they're the same price it seems to come down to this:

Nikon
Pros: Pretty dang sharp wide open, smaller/lighter than the Sigma
Cons: Not very good bokeh

Sigma
Pros: Creamy bokeh. Creamy bokeh. Creamy bokeh. Really sharp at f/2 and up.
Cons: Slightly soft at f/1.4, but still better than the other 50s it was compared against; larger, heavier.

Does it make any difference if you use a Lens from the same brand as your camera?

 

[rogersmj]

No, that really has nothing to do with it. There's plenty of examples of third-party lenses that aren't as high quality as the camera manufacturers' own lenses, and some people will only buy Nikon lenses for Nikon cameras, but that's just ignorant brand loyalty IMO. If Sigma makes a good lens -- like in this case, they have -- it's just as worthy of consideration as the first-party lenses.

 

[luminosity]

Until Nikon's AF-S lens was released this year, I think a good argument could have been made that Sigma had the best 50mm lens available for Nikon. They exploited Nikon's sloth in getting an AF-S version of the 50mm out, and did it with what by most accounts is a great lens.

It may still be the best.

 

[Digital Skunk]

No, that really has nothing to do with it. There's plenty of examples of third-party lenses that aren't as high quality as the camera manufacturers' own lenses, and some people will only buy Nikon lenses for Nikon cameras, but that's just ignorant brand loyalty IMO. If Sigma makes a good lens -- like in this case, they have -- it's just as worthy of consideration as the first-party lenses.

Very true. The Tokina 12-24 f4 has been regarded as the better lens for the Nikon DX body... over Nikon's own version of the lens. The Tokina is just as sharp, and just as quick at focusing at about half the price.

The only caveat I have noticed and seen is the lens extension during zoom, and I would put up with that to get an on par lens at $500 less.

 

[compuwar]

Very true. The Tokina 12-24 f4 has been regarded as the better lens for the Nikon DX body... over Nikon's own version of the lens.

Actually, I think that's a bad example. The Tokina is generally thought to be almost as good and economically a better buy, not a better lens overall according to pretty-much every review I've read. At 12-14mm, the Nikkor smokes it, and the Tokina has vignetting and chromatic aberration issues that are noticeably worse than the Nikkor.

http://davehutchison.blogspot.com/2007/11/nikon-vs-tokina-12-24mm-f4-dx-lense.html
http://www.nikonians.org/nikon/nikkor-12-24mm/super-wide_shootout_5.html
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/digital-wide-zooms/comparison.htm
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=13366600

 

[Hmac]

Do I understand correctly that the new Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 is made in China?