Fast 50 mm lens shoot out

[seismiccwave]

<p>On another thread Lex wanted to see a wide open aperture side by side test on various 50 mm lens for the Nikon bodies.<br>

Just so happened that I have a lot of various 50 mm focal length lenses so I set up a quick test.<br>

Some one may jump in and say these tests are not scientific and therefore useless. I grant you that but if you don't think these tests are valid then don't read anymore. I didn't spend one whole day of my life setting up the camera clicking away at a Jack Daniels bottle, sorting the images in photoshop, making the images small enough and magnified enough so you can look at it so that you tell me it is not valid. They are just simple tests for fun. <br>

So here is the first picture of the four lenses that I tested.<br>

1) An older manual focus Nikkor 50 mm f1.2 AIS lens.<br>

2) My original Nikkor autofocus 50 mm f1.4D lens. <br>

3) The brand spanking new just came from UPS Nikkor autofocus 50 mm f1.4G lens.<br>

4) My couple of weeks old Sigma 50 mm f1.4 autofocus lens that has earned rave reviews.</p>

<div></div>

[seismiccwave]

<p>OK, now that is out of the way. Onward to the setup. I simply put a bottle of Jack Daniels on a stool with two 100 watts continuous tungsten light on each side of the bottle. The camera body is a Nikon D700 on a tripod. on aperture priority. Here is the full frame I took with the Nikkor 50 mm f1.4G at f1.4</p><div></div>

[seismiccwave]

<p>Pretty hard to tell if it is any good. Here is one more with the Sigma 50 mm f1.4 at f1.4</p><div></div>

[seismiccwave]

<p>The camera has not moved and the subject did not move. The interesting thing is that they are not both 50 mm as the manufacturer claimed. There is a little field of view discrepancies. The Sigma image is a little wilder.<br>

So I did a 100% crop exercise with all the images.</p><div></div>

[ShunCheung]

<p>One thing to keep in mind is that focal length is always measured when focusing to infinity.</p>

[seismiccwave]

<p>Damn, at 100% it is still pretty darn hard to tell the difference between these lenses. So I decided to pixel peep and zoomed in to around 700% magnification. Sized the Jack Daniel's letters only and made a composite image of all the tests. Here is the result.</p><div></div>

[seismiccwave]

<p>That is still pretty hard to tell because I have to reduce the size of the image to fit this forum. If anyone is really interested you are welcome to email me and I will send you the full size images via email. So far what I found surprising is that the Nikkor 50 mm f1.4D is really not a bad lens at all. When I pixel peep, the D is really sharper at wide open than both the G and the Sigma.</p>

[commtrd]

<p>Hansen,<br>

I don't see a link for the rest of the test? Which lens do you personally prefer having both? What becomes apparent in a lot of cases with lens comparisons is that subjectivity in regards to desired results is a personal thing for example: I was reading a thread about the noct 58mm f1.2 lens on a D700 and a lot of the judgement about a lens' quality depends on how the viewer feels about extreme short depth of field shots. I think extremely narrow DOF can be quite pleasing in some cases and in a lot more, I think that same DOF is actually not as pleasing to the eye as stopping the lens down a bit. Yet some persist in shooting all the time with maximum aperture no matter what. But that is the art of photography and the beauty of it as well. </p>

[commtrd]

<p>OK the rest of the test showed up. I just needed to refresh the page. Thanks for posting.</p>

[jorgen_udvang]

<p>I believe there must be something wrong with your Sigma. Other tests show that it excels wide open, with regards to sharpness as well as bokeh. Still, I wouldn't buy such a huge lens for the sharpness alone. Even my Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 is rather sharp. When it comes to bokeh however, there's nothing out there beating the Sigma, at least not any lens that I'm aware of.</p>

[seismiccwave]

<p>There could very well be something wrong with my Sigma. I like it a lot and I have no problem hanging onto it. Some day I may send it in to Sigma and let them do a calibration on it. Yes, I also love the bokeh on the Sigma but I can't tell you about the bokeh on the f1.4G yet since I never had time to do it. I just got the lens this morning.;-)<br>

I really don't think I will prefer one lens over another in a real world situation. I would love to get my hands on a Noct 58mm f1.2. </p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>decidedly a non-scientific test. but in the two FF pictures, the sigma seems to have the edge in color renditions. if you look at the bottle, in the sigma pic the liquid looks caramel, which is more lifelike IMO. in the nikon photo it looks darker, more brownish. the sigma also picked up the edge of the leather chair (sofa?) to the right a little better -- in the nikon shot the upholstery nails are less sharp/defined. looking at the bokeh, it seems like a very close call but the sigma seems more light-sensitive wide open. wondering why you didnt post all the 100% crops as you did with the niikon AF-D, though.</p>

[farski]

<p>I'm sure this could be any number of things, but in comparing the FF shots, the price tag from the Nikkor is waaayy better than the sigma for sharpness.</p>

[bill_keane2]

<p><strong><em>"When I pixel peep, the D is really sharper at wide open than both the G and the Sigma."</em></strong><br>

You would think the G would be sharper han the D (unless there was some other area where it clearly excels and therefore compensates). According to others, the G also has more barrel distortion than the D...</p>

<p><em><strong>"When it comes to bokeh however, there's nothing out there beating the Sigma, at least not any lens that I'm aware of."</strong></em><br>

The Sigma is a 9-bladed design...</p>

[bwcombs]

<p>Better still Hansen, I will email you my address, and you can send the Jack Daniels. I hate to see you drink alone!</p>

[dan_brown4]

<p>Wow! I could use one on the rocks ;-) Thanks for posting your tests. And, BTW, you have a nice corral of fast 50's.<br>

To my eye, the AF-D looks the sharpest and contrastiest. As between the full frame shots, the Nikkor looks contrastier than the Sigma, look at the price tags. Then, again, the exposures are a bit different, look at the arm of the chair.</p>

<p>I'd ask for the bigger files, but I feel the neither of the AF-S lenses is better-enough to make me sell my AF-D.</p>

[bill_keane2]

<p>Question Hansen... How have you found the focus behaviour on the Sigma? Fast/slow; accurate/back-front prone? </p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Thanks, Hansen. The new Nikkor looks plenty sharp wide open. The AF-S design interests me because I like to combine autofocus with quick manual adjustments. Very awkward to do with screwdriver type AF Nikkors.</p>

<p>Sharpness wide open was my primary concern. The flare and coma issues were secondary. CA can easily be fixed in editing. Bokeh doesn't concern me much. If viewers are drooling or fretting over the OOF areas of a photo instead of the subject and composition, I'm doing something wrong.</p>

[seismiccwave]

<p>Eric, I don't know the protocol in a normal forum post. I hate to answer myself 18 times just to post the 19 100% crop pictures. Besides when the pictures are in a vertical line you may not be able to see the results as well. That is the reason why I offered to send any one the full size images in an email. There are a lot more things to look at in full frame. I have a Don Julio Tequila box in the back ground to show some bokeh.;-)<br>

Sorry BW I don't like Jack Daniels. Why do you think I can use the same bottle for lens test. If it was something else the bottle would have been empty long time ago.;-)<br>

Bill, I like the behaviour on the Sigma. It focus very fast and with my D700 it is pretty accurate. I have not done a 45 degree focus test on it yet. The depth of field is so shallow at wide open that I am more to blame then the lens if the subject is not in focus.<br>

Another interesting point is that the exposure is slightly different between all the lenses. The shutter speed was not the same for every lens at the same aperture.<br>

Dan, thank you. For some strange reason I kept on collecting 50 mm lenses of various brands. There are a few more I love to collect.</p>

<p> </p>

[arthuryeo]

<p>Based on the MTF diagram, the Sigma seems to have a slight edge over the Nikkor wide open in both the coarse and fine resolution tests.</p>

 

[seismiccwave]

<p>Bill, since I am on a roll. I just finished some focus test on the same four lenses. Conclusion either I have a bad copy of the Nikkor 50 mm f1.4G or that silent wave motor autofocus is very slow. The Sigma and the older f1.4D focused much faster than the new Nikon G.<br>

I did some static focus test and not surprising all the lenses are a bit front focused. My Nikon D90 has the same problem. The only difference is that I can adjust the D700.<br>

Here is the first boring focus chart.</p>

<div></div>

[seismiccwave]

<p>Here is one with the older Nikkor 50 mm f1.4D AF</p>

[seismiccwave]

<p>Whoops, forgot the picture.</p><div></div>

[seismiccwave]

<p>Now the Nikkor 50mm f1.4G AF-S</p><div></div>

[seismiccwave]

<p>Lastly the Sigma 50mm f1.4</p><div></div>