50mm Coma Sigma Art vs Regular Sigma F1.4

[extremeinstability]

Had a rented 50 Art last weekend and did a quick coma comparison in the corner of a full frame 6D. Old on the left Art on the right. F1.4, F2, F2.8. Ignore the brightness differences as it's just different areas of the sky. I should have done them on the tracking mount instead or paid more attention to location but it really doesn't matter for this.

Most all the 50mm offerings are so bad at it. The Art I'd hoped was even better than it was. Even if at the same time it is far better than the others, minus the Zeiss and the more expensive Nikon. In a way it's a 1 stop boost in less coma. Though yeah it is going to be sharper anyway. But if I was shooting something with street lights near the corners or with stars, I'd probably feel the need to head to F2.8. And if I'm at F2.8 I just about may as well be using the old Sigma. It's softer but guessing I'd maybe sell it for $200, making the jump $750 and I'm not sure it is that much softer when we're talking far corners here anyway. Not sure why I had it in my head the F2.8 Art coma result is what F1.4 was going to be closer to. Lenstip made it seem close to that. Or well lenstip coma at F1.4 looks like my star test between F2 and F2.8 I guess.

Anyway, just an example for those looking at getting it for that reason, which is probably many.

 

[sdsr]

Most all the 50mm offerings are so bad at it. The Art I'd hoped was even better than it was. Even if at the same time it is far better than the others, minus the Zeiss and the more expensive Nikon. In a way it's a 1 stop boost in less coma. Though yeah it is going to be sharper anyway. But if I was shooting something with street lights near the corners or with stars, I'd probably feel the need to head to F2.8. And if I'm at F2.8 I just about may as well be using the old Sigma. It's softer but guessing I'd maybe sell it for $200, making the jump $750 and I'm not sure it is that much softer when we're talking far corners here anyway. Not sure why I had it in my head the F2.8 Art coma result is what F1.4 was going to be closer to. Lenstip made it seem close to that. Or well lenstip coma at F1.4 looks like my star test between F2 and F2.8 I guess.

Anyway, just an example for those looking at getting it for that reason, which is probably many.

Very useful - thanks! (It's the superior coma performance of the Sigma 35mm art compared to other 35mm lenses I've used, more than anything else, that keeps tempting me.)

 

[tron]

@extremeinstability: thanks for this and generally for all your coma tests. They are very useful.

Still looking for a very wide, very bright lens with not much coma.

I know that you would suggest the Samyang 14 2.8 but I had found a used (but excellent) Canon 14mm 2.8 II for about 1000 Euros less than the street price. After getting rid of old gear I didn't want I paid about half of the used selling price. So I took it and left happy

True there is a little coma at the corners but nothing serious like my now sold 16-35mm 2.8 (version 1).

 

[epsiloneri]

Thanks for the comparison, great work. From various reviews it seems that even the great Otus shows significant coma at 1.4, have you made any comparisons yourself? A bit disappointing, I hope the rumoured future Sigma 24/1.4 Art fares better, with a coma similar to the Samyang 24/1.4 (or even better).

 

[extremeinstability]

Nope haven't touched an Otus yet. I do wish Samyang at least had a 50mm option to try out.