What is an "art" lens?
Jul 25, 2016 20:06:24 #
While checking DXOmark on the ranking of a certain lens I had been considering, the site rated a Sigma "art" lens with a much higher rating. So what is an "art" lens and what qualifies it as an art lens? If I am planning to use this lens for "nifty fifty" photos is this a lens that I should consider or does it have a specific purpose that might not be right for what I want to use it for?
If you are interested....I was looking at the numbers for a Nikon 58mm 1.4 ($1500). It was ranked with a 27 on a Nikon D750. 18 for sharpness. This lens has been listed in articles as being very sharp.
The "art" lens is a Sigma 50mm 1.4. Rated at a 41 on the D750 with a sharpness of 24 and retails for $950.
Any one have any experience with either or both lenses?
If you are interested....I was looking at the numbers for a Nikon 58mm 1.4 ($1500). It was ranked with a 27 on a Nikon D750. 18 for sharpness. This lens has been listed in articles as being very sharp.
The "art" lens is a Sigma 50mm 1.4. Rated at a 41 on the D750 with a sharpness of 24 and retails for $950.
Any one have any experience with either or both lenses?
Jul 25, 2016 20:17:39 #
Jul 25, 2016 20:32:30 #
Thank you, Wallbanger, that answers a few of my questions. I still don't know what an art lens is.
Jul 25, 2016 20:37:01 #
luvmypets wrote:
While checking DXOmark on the ranking of a certain... (show quote)
Not the 50 but the Sigma 35. Let me know if you interested in my experience. Otherwise, my post is off topic.
Jul 25, 2016 20:39:06 #
Jim Bob wrote:
Not the 50 but the Sigma 35. Let me know if you interested in my experience. Otherwise, my post is off topic.
I would like your opinion of the Sigma brand. I have Nikon and Tamron lenses and have never used Sigmas so your input would be helpful in deciding to go with this lens. Thank you!!!
Jul 25, 2016 20:39:56 #
It's just a brand to differentiate their lenses. Think Chevy, Buick, Cadillac.
From what I understand, the Art lenses are focused more on fast speeds, image quality, etc. Contemporary are their middle of the road. Sport are focused on weather sealing and rugged construction. Oversimplified, but that's the just of it.
From what I understand, the Art lenses are focused more on fast speeds, image quality, etc. Contemporary are their middle of the road. Sport are focused on weather sealing and rugged construction. Oversimplified, but that's the just of it.
Jul 25, 2016 20:44:17 #
Wallbanger wrote:
It's just a brand to differentiate their lenses. Think Chevy, Buick, Cadillac.
From what I understand, the Art lenses are focused more on fast speeds, image quality, etc. Contemporary are their middle of the road. Sport are focused on weather sealing and rugged construction. Oversimplified, but that's the just of it.
From what I understand, the Art lenses are focused more on fast speeds, image quality, etc. Contemporary are their middle of the road. Sport are focused on weather sealing and rugged construction. Oversimplified, but that's the just of it.
Thank you!!! That explains a lot. I appreciate your time.
Jul 25, 2016 20:50:28 #
luvmypets wrote:
I would like your opinion of the Sigma brand. I have Nikon and Tamron lenses and have never used Sigmas so your input would be helpful in deciding to go with this lens. Thank you!!!
So far I am extremely impressed with my Sigma lenses. I have several including the 35 Art. I find they are hard to beat for the money. You can spend twice the money on a Nikon or Canon, but you will get no where near twice the performance. The reviews on the 50 are almost universally excellent. If you wish, send me a private message and I'll tell you which lenses I have and what my experience is. I generally don't like listing my equipment on an open forum.
Jul 25, 2016 20:54:32 #
An 'Art lens"???
Who knows. Prime lenses are dedicated lenses some for portrait, other landscape close-up and whatever. These maybe refereed to as 'art lenses' but quite frankly, the 'art' part is what is behind the camera.
Who knows. Prime lenses are dedicated lenses some for portrait, other landscape close-up and whatever. These maybe refereed to as 'art lenses' but quite frankly, the 'art' part is what is behind the camera.
Jul 25, 2016 21:02:04 #
Rongnongno wrote:
An 'Art lens"???
Who knows. Prime lenses are dedicated lenses some for portrait, other landscape close-up and whatever. These maybe refereed to as 'art lenses' but quite frankly, the 'art' part is what is behind the camera.
Who knows. Prime lenses are dedicated lenses some for portrait, other landscape close-up and whatever. These maybe refereed to as 'art lenses' but quite frankly, the 'art' part is what is behind the camera.
I agree that the "art" is behind the camera. Thank you for you time and input. It is appreciated!!
Jul 25, 2016 21:39:15 #
luvmypets wrote:
I agree that the "art" is behind the camera. Thank you for you time and input. It is appreciated!!
luv, as you already know the Sigma ART line is the higher end of the Sigma line. Most are rear focusing if I remember correctly. That usually makes them sharper but with many more elements and a complex design, also making them bigger and heavier.
There is a lot to consider other than price. No the Nikon is not twice as sharpe, but it just might be twice as good. Will the Art lens last 30 years? Will it have even half as much resale as a Nikon lens in ten years. Will it even be able to be repaired in 10 years?
Will it even be compatible with your new camera body, 3 camera bodies from today.
A lot more to a lens than what you see on DXO, unless that's the only thing that's important to you!! Good luck
SS
Jul 25, 2016 21:42:28 #
SharpShooter wrote:
luv, as you already know the Sigma ART line is the... (show quote)
Thank you, SharpShooter!!! That gives me more to think about.
Jul 26, 2016 06:22:33 #
luvmypets wrote:
While checking DXOmark on the ranking of a certain... (show quote)
From what I understand, the art line is Sigma's best offering in lenses. I hear that are very good and those that own them really love them. The only Sigma lens I have is the older 17-35mm f2.8-4.0. Its a very sharp lens. Only problem I see with it is that it distorts more then the Nikon does when not parallel to the subject (or perpendicular, depending on how you view it). Even though I value it as an ultra wide zoom and I like a lot.
Jul 26, 2016 06:35:36 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
luvmypets wrote:
While checking DXOmark on the ranking of a certain... (show quote)
Lens ratings are just what they are, lens ratings. Lens ratings do not take into account the photographer or real life shooting. IT IS WHAT THE PHOTOGRAPHER DOES WITH THE LENS THAT COUNTS. Too often folks ask "What lens should I use for my trip to Alaska? or What is the sharpest wide angle lens I can buy? or What is the best walk-around lens I can buy?" Instead folks should study good photo's and what does it take to take a good photo. Develop an eye for a GOOD photo. Look over National Geographic or other fine mags and see what good photography is. It is not the Lens, it is the person behind the lens that counts. When I taught photography I would not let my students take any photo's for the first four weeks, we studied rules of composition and photo basics, and, what to look for in a good photo. Then, we started to photograph, not take photo's.
Jul 26, 2016 06:54:29 #
luvmypets wrote:
While checking DXOmark on the ranking of a certain... (show quote)
The word is a marketer's effort. (Not to say there are no differences, of course.)
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.