What's new
L-MOUNT Forum

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

Sigma 50mm f/2 DG DN Contemporary (I-Series)

Jonathan-Mac said:
The Lumix 50/1.8 is also superb, optically maybe even better than the Sigma. If you go for one then make sure to check it for fogging and to make sure it's a sharp copy. Of the three I've used one had fogging (but was excellent), one was very, very soft and the other (the one I have now) is perfect except for some internal dust.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I've unfortunately been reading the dpreview threads about the lens issues, especially the 24-105. Maybe that's why my order was never delivered?

So basically then you can't buy these lenses blind or shouldn't do.
Jonathan-Mac said:
I still use my Pentax (and other) manual 50mm lenses, now more than ever as they're so much better on the S5 than on an APS-C Pentax DSLR. I wouldn't be without at least one AF fast fifty on the L-mount though - partly for the AF itself and partly because they're so much sharper wide open, they give a different look.
Click to expand...
+1

The K55 f1.8 could be a favourite then, I even liked it on APSC but it was too telephoto. I'll hopefully try them all eventually. I did sell my M50 f1.4 a few years ago though.
 
Jonathan-Mac said:
I still use my Pentax (and other) manual 50mm lenses, now more than ever as they're so much better on the S5 than on an APS-C Pentax DSLR.
I wouldn't be without at least one AF fast fifty on the L-mount though - partly for the AF itself and partly because they're so much sharper wide open,
they give a different look.
Click to expand...
Over the years I never was a dedicated AF user in general. (Even switched off AF in many cases when an AF lens was used).
But to focus quickly and accurately for people and portraits, especially at large and fully wide open aperture values.
By today's options for AF detection of people and eyes. I don't want to miss these AF options for these subjects any-more.
It can not be beaten by manual focusing. (Always some moving of subject, or me myself - manual focus takes to long. "Sparkling" moment is over).

Specially by the far better optic qualities at wide apertures of today's lenses. It can be fully used wide open.
(By the swallow DOF, it becomes a necessity for precise focusing).
Using my today "L-mount" primes exclusively at wider apertures. (50mm ---> F 1.4 to about F 2.8)

From my more early times.
E.g. having a manual Voigtländer Nokton 58mm/F1.4 - "SL" lens (having a Nikon mount), for its rendering.
I didn't use the utmost wide opening F 1.4, as it was "to soft" and hazy IMO. Only starting as from F 2.0 and up.
Although this focal length was a wonderful addition for doing portraiture on an APS-C sensor, as for the smaller angle of view.
(Comparable ~85mm lens used on Full Frame sensor body).

As by the better optics today, I make use of the older manual lenses "less and less".
 
Last edited:
Babylonia said:
Over the years I never was a dedicated AF user in general. (Even switched off AF in many cases when an AF lens was used).
But to focus quickly and accurately for people and portraits, especially at large and fully wide open aperture values.
By today's options for AF detection of people and eyes. I don't want to miss these AF options for these subjects any-more.
It can not be beaten by manual focusing. (Always some moving of subject, or me myself - manual focus takes to long. "Sparkling" moment is over).

Specially by the far better optic qualities at wide apertures of today's lenses. It can be fully used wide open.
(By the swallow DOF, it becomes a necessity for precise focusing).
Using my today "L-mount" primes exclusively at wider apertures. (50mm ---> F 1.4 to about F 2.8)

From my more early times.
E.g. having a manual Voigtländer Nokton 58mm/F1.4 - "SL" lens (having a Nikon mount), for its rendering.
I didn't use the utmost wide opening F 1.4, as it was "to soft" and hazy IMO. Only starting as from F 2.0 and up.
Although this focal length was a wonderful addition for doing portraiture on an APS-C sensor, as for the smaller angle of view.
(Comparable ~85mm lens used on Full Frame sensor body).

As by the better optics today, I make use of the older manual lenses "less and less".
Click to expand...
I agree and I'll most likely go the same way with not using the legacy lenses I have. I have some nice ones with relatively high value I may probably sell for the new tech glass which besides useably sharp wide open also have better contast. I'll keep a few for the film cameras.
 
Reading your thread again reminds me how I need proper weather sealing as totally drenched last 2 sessions, today in a storm... Sigma Contemporary lens might have died?
 
Oíche said:
Yeah, I've unfortunately been reading the dpreview threads about the lens issues, especially the 24-105. Maybe that's why my order was never delivered?

So basically then you can't buy these lenses blind or shouldn't do.
Click to expand...
There would be 10's of thousands of these lenses sold, you never really hear from the happy customers. You do hear from unhappy amateur lens testers on interwebz forums though. Which tends to really distort the reality. Quite badly. Let me rectify that a fraction, mine (the S 50 f1.8) is sharp from edge to edge wide open, I bought it sight unseen for a whole $294 brand spanking new, on a Black Friday sale.
240106-P1000840.jpg
  • Panasonic - DC-S5
  • LUMIX S 50/F1.8
  • 50.0 mm
  • ƒ/1.8
  • 1/4000 sec
  • Pattern
  • Auto exposure
  • -0.3
  • ISO 100
 
I haven't tested the weather sealing on any of my Contemporary series lenses and I don't plan to - any time when there's the risk of rain or sand I use my sealed lenses.

This thread is for images from the Sigma 50mm f/2 DG DN lens rather than the Lumix 50/1.8.
 
I am totally impressed with my Sigma i-series 50/2.0 DG DN. I use it only on a 24MP sensor but it clearly shows, that it could handle also 60MP. From the image quality, it is IMHO very close to my Leica 43/2.0 Apo lens in the Leica Q3 43. I can not really compare it, since I do not have a 60MP camera to put the Sigma on it. But the 100% crops are very impressive. For people/skin very good.

Very clear and very detailed almost like the 65mm, but not that "clinical" sharp as the Sigma 65. Jpeg ooc in LR6 at 100% view

Sigma_50F2DGDN_S5ii_100prozent.jpg

Sigma_50F2DGDN_S5ii_100prozent_b.jpg
 
How different is this lens compared to 28-70/2.8 and lumix 50/1.8 regarding rendering ? Night and day or just subtle and for the trained eye?

Sometimes I think we care too much about stuff that is in the end not an issue at all except for knowing that lens x-y-z is soo much better like 99.4 VS 99.6 greatmess. Once printed it doesn’t matter at all. And I’m soooo very guilty as charged.

But still interested in the answer or hopefully comparison pictures.

@Jonathan-Mac I really love these pictures. They definitely have some pop and 3d look which I like.
 
RuleOfThirds said:
How different is this lens compared to 28-70/2.8 and Lumix 50/1.8 regarding rendering ? Night and day or just subtle and for the trained eye?

Sometimes I think we care too much about stuff that is in the end not an issue at all except for knowing that lens x-y-z is soo much better like 99.4 VS 99.6 greatness. Once printed it doesn’t matter at all. And I’m soooo very guilty as charged.

But still interested in the answer or hopefully comparison pictures.

@Jonathan-Mac I really love these pictures. They definitely have some pop and 3d look which I like.
Click to expand...
I can't comment on the 28-70/2.8 (I have the 24-70/2.8) but the difference between the Lumix 50/1.8 and the Sigma 50/2 in rendering is not great. As much as I want to love the Sigma more, because it cost a lot more and is much more enjoyable to use (metal build, smooth manual focus, lovely clicky aperture ring), I can't help but feel that the rendering of the Lumix is slightly better - more 3D and "alive".

I really should do some side-by-side tests with both but that requires time and when I go somewhere with photography in mind I invariably take only one or the other, not both. I could even add in the EF 50/1.8 STM, which I can also use on my S5.

I would recommend both and am happy owning both (although sometimes I think i should have saved longer and bought the Sigma 50/1.4 Art instead of the 50/2). I have also read good things about the Meike 55/1.8 Pro and am very tempted to get it too. After all, it's not another 50mm, it's 55mm... :)
 
RuleOfThirds said:
How different is this lens compared to 28-70/2.8 and lumix 50/1.8
Click to expand...

I did only a handful shots years ago to compare the Lumix 50/1.8 vs. the Sigma 50/20. Nothing scientific. I liked the Sigma more.

To compare the Sigma 28-70/2.8 zoom with the Sigma 50/2.0 is not fair. I never really compared them side by side.


RuleOfThirds said:
Sometimes I think we care too much about stuff that is in the end not an issue at all except for knowing that lens x-y-z is soo much better like 99.4 VS 99.6 greatmess.
Click to expand...

That is true. But this is normal, it is our hobby. Compared to film 20 years ago, every lens is better. Even with 16 MP cameras, no matter how you look at your images.

RuleOfThirds said:
Once printed it doesn’t matter at all.
Click to expand...

That depends on the sensor, MP and print size. If you pixelpeep, you will always find differences. This is why I do not care beyond 100% in LR6 with jpegs ooc. A combination of "worst case file" with 100% enlargement shows me, what I can expect in case I would print very big - which I almost never do.

But I plan to switch to my 4k TV screen for my photos. 25 years ago, I had slides and a slide projector. This shall be now my 4K TV. Something between 55 and 65 inch should be enough for the next 10 years. With this size, you will easier detect differences, if you have a very good OLED TV like the top line of LG etc.

In this case the best will become the enemy of the good.
 
Totally off topic but in answer to Dirk
I export my most liked pictures to 4K and put them in an iCloud album and use AppleTV with the default photo’s app to show my photo’s of on my 55” 4K tv. But it is getting a bit older (try 8 years) and will upgrade it to 65” oled or miniled with some black friday deal or something.

I print mostly on canvas 90x60 or 120x80 in cm. For the large size I try to use the high res mode.

Maybe I will try to make comparison images between 50/1.8, 28-70/2.8 and 24-105/4 all at 50mm from a tripod up-to f5.6, and maybe do the same at 35 when I’m at it, with 35/1.8

Think fixed White balance and in M mode, jpg only to see difference in T stops and color as well. Never done test shots that way :)
 
Jonathan-Mac said:
I can't comment on the 28-70/2.8 (I have the 24-70/2.8) but the difference between the Lumix 50/1.8 and the Sigma 50/2 in rendering is not great. As much as I want to love the Sigma more, because it cost a lot more and is much more enjoyable to use (metal build, smooth manual focus, lovely clicky aperture ring), I can't help but feel that the rendering of the Lumix is slightly better - more 3D and "alive".
Click to expand...
What qualities did you notice in the rendering that made you feel that way?

I’ve posted here before about other Sigma lenses I’ve used (the 45 Contemporary and some M43/Sony E) having ‘flatter’ tonal rendering - showing fewer tonal shades and therefore losing subtle tonal distinctions - so I’m wondering if this is something similar.
 
RuleOfThirds said:
How different is this lens compared to 28-70/2.8 and lumix 50/1.8 regarding rendering ? Night and day or just subtle and for the trained eye?
Click to expand...
The only reason I would update -not upgrade, my Lumix S 50, would be to gain faster aperture. That's it. If the S 50 is good enough that Leica puts their name on it and sells it as their own, then it's more than good enough for me.
I'm also wildly impressed with my Sigma 28-70mm F2.8, I honestly can't see any reason to update that with any other zoom lens either. Just a waste of money for me. I've actually tested it against my Lumix 50 F1.8 -once again I'm in absolutely no way, shape or form a lens tester, I've just shot a couple of frames here or there when I've happened to have both with me, and just like with the Lumix S 18mm F1.8, any differences in absolute sharpness can be attributed to slight differences in focal point/plane location. Obviously, F1.8 is going to give a bit less DOF than F2.8. If you have to zoom in to 150% to try and spot any differences, that's nothing to do with photography at all. In my book.
I'm going to have absolutely zero qualms or hesitation in taking my Siggy 28-70mm with me in a couple of weeks when we travel overseas for near on two months. It's really really good.
Still contemplating the Lumix S 14-28 mm vs my new 18mm F1.8 We're going to a couple of places that may benefit from having the 14-17mm range in a zoom.
 
I shot a couple of frames side by side, will post them later. Just from the hand. I think I post them in the 28-70 thread. It‘s not Night and day difference. Did not shoot them for sharpness, don’t care too much about that. All Lumix and sigma dg dn l-mount primes and fixed aperture lenses are sharp enough for 24mp. But just for rendering and color/contrast/bokeh/pop difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top