DXOMark Compares the Sigma 50 f/1.4 Art to Zeiss 55 f/1.4 Otus

[Canon Rumors]

<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/04/dxomark-compares-sigma-50-f1-4-art-to-otus/"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/04/dxomark-compares-sigma-50-f1-4-art-to-otus/">Tweet</a></div>
<p>DXOMark has completed their review of the Sigma 50 f/1.4 DG HSM Art series lens and put it in direct competition with the Zeiss 55 f/1.4 Otus lens. The Sigma holds up very well. However, as expected, the Zeiss does look to be a better lens optically, as it should be at 4 times the price.</p>
<p><strong>When compared to the Otus</strong>

<em>“At f2 the Sigma is almost on a par with the Zeiss, only it can’t quite match the Zeiss in the corners – though the difference in real world terms is trivial. The new Sigma can boast of slightly better control of vignetting and, arguably, chromatic aberration at maximum aperture, though there’s some fringing evident in the extreme corners. The Zeiss has remarkable transmission but, at close to $4,000, nothing short of exceptional performance is expected.”</em></p>
<p><strong>DXOMark Conclusion

</strong><em>“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.”<strong>

</strong></em></p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Sigma-50mm-F1.4-DG-HSM-A-Canon-lens-review-Art-for-Art-s-sake" target="_blank">Read the full review</a> | <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1045458-REG/sigma_311101_50mm_f_1_4_dg_hsm.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">Preorder the Sigma 50 f/1.4 DG Art</a></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

 

[jrista]

*Sigh*

DXOs Lens test results are so useless. They rate it less than the Otus, as they should, however all of the measures they choose to exhibit would otherwise indicate that the new Sigma 50 should be the better lens. Comparatively, it has the same resolution, better transmission, less distortion, and less CA than the Otus. Only in a footnote do you actually learn why DXO rates the Otus higher: It has sharper corners.

Bleh. DXO. Bleh. It's like they just barf up test results and let the chunks & giblets remain where they plop.

I think the world would be well-served if DXO just gave up on lens tests alltogether, nuked their lens tests database, and just stuck with sensor tests. (And furthermore, I think the world would be better served if DXO did away with scalar test "scores"...just as useless as the chunks and giblets that is their lens tests.)

 

[Viggo]

*Sigh*

Comparatively, it has the same resolution, better transmission, less distortion, and less CA than the Otus.

Sigma is 1.7 T stop vs Otus at 1.5 T stop.

 

[jrista]

*Sigh*

Comparatively, it has the same resolution, better transmission, less distortion, and less CA than the Otus.

Sigma is 1.7 T stop vs Otus at 1.5 T stop.

Ah, you are right.

Regardless, the Sigma looks like an excellent lens, and at only a quarter the cost of the Otus.

 

[jdramirez]

At least we have more gas to put on the fire... it will keep us busy until the damn lens is released... and then we get to be excited or disappointed based on our own experiences.

 

[Viggo]

*Sigh*

Comparatively, it has the same resolution, better transmission, less distortion, and less CA than the Otus.

Sigma is 1.7 T stop vs Otus at 1.5 T stop.

Ah, you are right.

Regardless, the Sigma looks like an excellent lens, and at only a quarter the cost of the Otus.

I agree completely, this could be a really epic winner.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, when they go all in, it's always a success.

 

[CarlMillerPhoto]

I submitted my preorder on B&H 3 hours after they started taking them (so at like 3am EST). Think my spot in line is good enough to be fulfilled with the first shipment? I would think so, but I don't have any previous experience with preorders.

 

[brad-man]

Well, there's around a 13 month separation between the game-changing release of the 35A and the equally game-changing release of the 50A (relevancy?). So which lens is slated for next year? I'm hoping for the 85, though I suspect it will be a 24. 135 f/2 anyone?

Who would have thought just a few short years ago, that Sigma would become the preeminent AF lens manufacturer? Certainly not me...

 

[CarlMillerPhoto]

Well, there's around a 13 month separation between the game-changing release of the 35A and the equally game-changing release of the 50A (relevancy?). So which lens is slated for next year? I'm hoping for the 85, though I suspect it will be a 24. 135 f/2 anyone?

Who would have thought just a few short years ago, that Sigma would become the preeminent AF lens manufacturer? Certainly not me...

24mm f/1.4 next please. Not impressed with the SamRokin 24mm, and the Canon is ungodly expensive.

Wouldn't this be a nice Sigma Roadmap ;D

35mm f/1.4 Art - $899
50mm f/1.4 Art - $950
24mm f/1.4 Art - $950
85mm f/1.4 Art - $799
135mm f/1.8 OS Art - $950

At the current rate, my bag will have nothing but Sigma primes and Tamron Zooms lol. Although if a 24mm & 85mm continue on Sigma's new level of quality, by the time a stabilized 135mm f/1.8 is released it should be priced at $2,000. Not that I want to pay that much (and probably wouldn't), but I'd like to see the new Sigma quality truly recognized, if that make sense.

 

[Radiating]

Well, there's around a 13 month separation between the game-changing release of the 35A and the equally game-changing release of the 50A (relevancy?). So which lens is slated for next year? I'm hoping for the 85, though I suspect it will be a 24. 135 f/2 anyone?

Who would have thought just a few short years ago, that Sigma would become the preeminent AF lens manufacturer? Certainly not me...

24mm f/1.4 next please. Not impressed with the SamRokin 24mm, and the Canon is ungodly expensive.

Wouldn't this be a nice Sigma Roadmap ;D

35mm f/1.4 Art - $899
50mm f/1.4 Art - $950
24mm f/1.4 Art - $950
85mm f/1.4 Art - $799
135mm f/1.8 OS Art - $950

At the current rate, my bag will have nothing but Sigma primes and Tamron Zooms lol. Although if a 24mm & 85mm continue on Sigma's new level of quality, by the time a stabilized 135mm f/1.8 is released it should be priced at $2,000. Not that I want to pay that much (and probably wouldn't), but I'd like to see the new Sigma quality truly recognized, if that make sense.

Honestly I'm really wishing for this to happen, a whole line of world beating primes, would make me amazingly happy to have in my bag.

Plus the rumors of the 24-70mm f/2.0 and Sigma wide angle zoom have me even more excited. If Sigma is fast enough to the game, photographers in a few years might just shoot with their favorites first party bodies and nothing but Sigma lenses...

 

[yeahyoung]

*Sigh*

DXOs Lens test results are so useless. They rate it less than the Otus, as they should, however all of the measures they choose to exhibit would otherwise indicate that the new Sigma 50 should be the better lens. Comparatively, it has the same resolution, better transmission, less distortion, and less CA than the Otus. Only in a footnote do you actually learn why DXO rates the Otus higher: It has sharper corners.

Bleh. DXO. Bleh. It's like they just barf up test results and let the chunks & giblets remain where they plop.

I think the world would be well-served if DXO just gave up on lens tests alltogether, nuked their lens tests database, and just stuck with sensor tests. (And furthermore, I think the world would be better served if DXO did away with scalar test "scores"...just as useless as the chunks and giblets that is their lens tests.)

Sigma's scores were based on measures at F2, Otus F1.4.

 

[SoullessPolack]

Why does everyone seem to think they're going to make a 135mm f/1.8? And why does everyone think it's going to be a f/1.8 instead of f2?

 

[verysimplejason]

This will be my first 50mm upgrade if reviews would find AF to be fine on 6D.

 

[CarlMillerPhoto]

Why does everyone seem to think they're going to make a 135mm f/1.8? And why does everyone think it's going to be a f/1.8 instead of f2?

Just cause there have been rumors about one in the past. Plus, with the fact that Sigma is the only company with a f/1.8 zoom in the market it would seem appropriate. But f/1.8 or f/2, I doesn't really matter that much to me; marginal difference to the final photo. I think a f2 OS is more likely all things considered. And $950 would be perfect for the sub-$1k theme Sigma might be starting.

 

[brad-man]

Why does everyone seem to think they're going to make a 135mm f/1.8? And why does everyone think it's going to be a f/1.8 instead of f2?

Just cause there have been rumors about one in the past. Plus, with the fact that Sigma is the only company with a f/1.8 zoom in the market it would seem appropriate. But f/1.8 or f/2, I doesn't really matter that much to me; marginal difference to the final photo. I think a f2 OS is more likely all things considered. And $950 would be perfect for the sub-$1k theme Sigma might be starting.

Works for me. As much as I'd love a fantastic 24, I would use an 85 and probably even a 135 more often. OS would definitely be more desired than the difference between 1.8 and 2.0. I am more than satisfied with my Tamron SP24-70, but of coarse if Siggy really wants to give me GAS, they seem to have the wherewithal to do so.

 

[jdramirez]

I'm surprised that so far nobody has said DxO's results are meaningless because they don't represent bokeh in their tests results anywhere! But at least the first post on this thread doesn't disappoint with the expected putting down of DxO.

I'm waiting to be dismissive of the Ken Rockwell review. Till then I'll save up my indignance.

 

[Loswr]

Compared to the 50/1.2L

Name	Canon 50/1.2L	Sigma 50/1.4A
Sharpness	14	21
Transmission	1.4TStop	1.7TStop
Distortion	0.4%	0.1%
Vignetting	-2.4EV	-1.5EV
Chr Aberration	20µm	6µm

Not that it will help the 50L much, but you might want to report the data for the two lenses tested on the same camera, instead of different cameras. Either drop the Sigma to 18 P-Mpix for the 1DsIII, or raise the 50L to 16 P-Mpix for the 5DIII. Or just leave it alone if you'd prefer to artificially bias the data in favor of the point you're making.

 

[jrista]

Wonder if this lens will be eligible for Sigma's "mount conversion" service?

I'm surprised that so far nobody has said DxO's results are meaningless because they don't represent bokeh in their tests results anywhere! But at least the first post on this thread doesn't disappoint with the expected putting down of DxO.

When DxO get a Nikon mount copy of this lens, I think we'll see a much better representation of its capabilities. In at least one score, the "megapixel" thing, the scores are obviously limited to what Canon cameras can provide.

Compared to the 50/1.2L

Name	Canon 50/1.2L	Sigma 50/1.4A
Sharpness	14	21
Transmission	1.4TStop	1.7TStop
Distortion	0.4%	0.1%
Vignetting	-2.4EV	-1.5EV
Chr Aberration	20µm	6µm

Wow, that's about as cherry picked and biased a comparison as I've ever seen. Do you even try to be objective?

Here is a more reasonable comparison:

However, this is highly skewed, because DXO uses their T-stops "measure" to determine what the "best" aperture is...and they chose f/1.2 on the 50mm as it's "best". That is about as close to the WORST aperture the 50/1.2 has...it gets far sharper and eliminates a ton of CA and vignetting when you stop down a bit. I would have chosen f/1.4 or f/1.8, both of which are definitely better than f/1.2 on the 50L, however in all their great and wonderful BIAS, DXO has conveniently not offered those as options.

When I choose f/2.8 for the Sigma, Otus, and 50L, the sharpness plots norm up quite nicely. The falloff in the corners of the 50L is due to the spherical aberration...the same spherical aberration that Canon EXPLICITLY LEFT IN BY DESIGN, for aesthetic purposes. Ironically, at f/2.8, the Sigma beats the Otus corner to corner...you can see a bit of falloff on the Otus at f/2.8 and f/4, where as the Sigma is sharp through and through:

Similarly, stop down the lenses a bit, and the vignetting issues clear right up as well. The 50L actually has better vignetting than the new Art 50 at f/2.8:

I would share the CA fields maps, however again, DXO, in all their biased wisdom, only seems to have produced CA data for the maximum aperture. CA DEFINITELY drops in the corners as you stop down, since the narrower aperture is blocking light from the periphery of the lens where the most CA occurs. As such, it is only possible to compare the wide open performance, where, once again, the 50L is at it's worst (although again, much of it's wide open performance is explicitly by design, in order to achieve a specific aesthetically pleasing result.)

 

[Loswr]

Not that it will help the 50L much, but you might want to report the data for the two lenses tested on the same camera, instead of different cameras. Either drop the Sigma to 18 P-Mpix for the 1DsIII, or raise the 50L to 16 P-Mpix for the 5DIII. Or just leave it alone if you'd prefer to artificially bias the data in favor of the point you're making.

Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Fixed

You'd think DxO could code the site so the same camera was selected by default. But no...

 

[drjlo]

However, this is highly skewed, because DXO uses their T-stops "measure" to determine what the "best" aperture is...and they chose f/1.2 on the 50mm as it's "best". That is about as close to the WORST aperture the 50/1.2 has...

Wow, I never even realized DxO did this Looks like DxO chose f/2.0 for Sigma 50 and f/1.2 for 50L as "best" for their ratings. What the heck?