Opinions on Sigma 50mm f1.2 vs f1.4?

[Jan.Wedekind]

I want to treat myself with a nice prime and since I love the 85mm f1.4 but it’s sometimes a bit too narrow, I am considering one of the 50mm Art lenses.

They are bafflingly similar though. Price aside, I am not sure why Sigma released both. My first thought was that f1.4 is more than bright enough for me and surely it’ll be somewhat lighter and smaller, right? Except it isn’t by much…

Reviews basically are great for both, maybe a bit more glowing for the f1.2 but that might just be because it’s brighter and YT loves itself some shallow DoF.

So: anyone with hands on experience on both or either of them?

 

[dirk]

All YT reviews I have seen said that the 50/1.2 is better in image quality from F1.2 up to F5.6

 

[GeorgeHudetz]

If you enjoy reading detailed optical breakdowns of lenses, Lenstip.com has reviews of both lenses. Also, the 28-45 f/1.8, which you might find interesting.

Dustin Abbot probably has reviews of both. I like his reviewing style - he looks into detailed optical properties, but also talks about how he subjectively responds to the images created by the lenses.

 

[RBecker]

I owned the old 1.4/50 (hsm) and changed to the 1.2 DGDN when it was released. The optical quality of the old hsm was already good, but the 1.2 is flawless and the bokeh is georgous.
For me a change to the new 1.4 would not be so a big difference, but the 1.2 was a worthy step up…

 

[CharlesH]

I have the 1.2 and it is excellent optically. It's big enough I only break it out when I need it, but when I do it really performs.

 

[Jonathan-Mac]

From what I remember the 1.4 was the first attempt at a "prestige" standard lens for FF mirrorless, with the 1.2 coming later and fixing some of the weak points of the 1.4, so i't not just raw speed. Having said that, I'm sure that the 1.4 is also superb.