Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM

Mark-Anthony

Mark-Anthony

Messages
1,413
Name
mark
Edit My Images
No
Hi All

I've been looking at getting one of these lenses for my nikon d3200. thing is, I'm not sure if it's going to be a waste of money.

only reason I say waste is because I have the sigma 50mm f/1.4. I'm guessing there will be very little difference between the two, or am I totally wrong thinking this?
 
I had the original in Canon fit and thought it very good and sharp at f1.4.

The only negative things I can say about it are that it's a bit chunky and the focus ring was a big gritty when focusing manually. I think they updated this lens? If so I wonder if they fixed the gritty focus ring?
 
Hmm, see that would bug me. My 50mm is a great lens at 1.4 also, very crisp. I'm just wondering if it's ideal to have both prime lenses or am I wasting money when I don't need too?
 
I have a Sigma 30mm and a Canon 50mm on my Canon 7D. I found the 50mm a little too tight, it being a crop sensor, particularly for indoor shots for family occasions. Mine is the Sigma 30mm Art which is very nice and gives ~50mm in 35mm equivalent. Also, fast, quiet, focussing and good bokeh. I did do a quick review which should be on here somewhere if you can find it...
Kind if depends what you shoot...

cheers

J
 
Little_duke said:
Hmm, see that would bug me. My 50mm is a great lens at 1.4 also, very crisp. I'm just wondering if it's ideal to have both prime lenses or am I wasting money when I don't need too?
Click to expand...

I'd say that having both is a good idea. I had both and also had their excellent 85mm f1.4 too :D
 
Thanks for the review, J. very helpful. I think I'm going to buy one to see how it fairs, I have a family wedding in June and Ideally I'd like to try the 30mm out.
 
One last thing... remember that this lens is APS-C only and not a FF lens.
 
Little_duke said:
Hi All

I've been looking at getting one of these lenses for my nikon d3200. thing is, I'm not sure if it's going to be a waste of money.

only reason I say waste is because I have the sigma 50mm f/1.4. I'm guessing there will be very little difference between the two, or am I totally wrong thinking this?
Click to expand...

The Nikon Nikkor 35 1.8G is much much sharper. It also has consistent quality control. Many people complain about back/front focussing the old Sigma 30 1.4.

That being said. I prefer the bokeh from the sigma.
 
c-m said:
The Nikon Nikkor 35 1.8G is much much sharper. It also has consistent quality control. Many people complain about back/front focussing the old Sigma 30 1.4.

That being said. I prefer the bokeh from the sigma.
Click to expand...

Nikon v Sigma...

http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Sigm...Nikon-Versus-Nikon-AF-S-DX-Nikkor-35mm-f-1.8G

Of course the Nikon is f1.8 and the Sigma is f1.4.

Re the issue of focus... I've never had an issue with any Sigma lens on my 20D or 5D and specifically I never had an issue with my 30mm f1.4 however when I sold it the new owner posted images in which the focus was all over the place. When I offered to take it back and give a full refund I think he decided that it was user error. Whatever the reason for the focus issues in that case he kept the lens.
 
Last edited:
Use Photozone.de for actual MTF figures. DXOmark doesn't really tell much other than a mythical megapixel figure.

http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/628-nikkor3518dx?start=1
http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/791-sigma3014dcdx?start=1

The Nikkor has less vingetting, and just looks at the sharpness figures for the borders and exteme corners, just blows the Sigma away. Also better with CA too.

The Sigma does have 0.1% less distortion though, and the bokeh is slightly more creamy.

If you need f1.4 then the Sigma is the way to go, but for anything else the Nikkor has the better of it. Bear in mind that the Sigma is an old design now. Can't believe it was £400+ new even at the time the Nikkor 35mm was released at £140

Anyway, all that being said, I do still like the Sigma.
 
Last edited:
See, I did have the nikkor 50th f/1.8 and loved it. I was speaking to the tog at my sisters wedding and he was constantly on about the 1.4 being so much better, hence my original question.

I currently have the 50mm 1.4 sigma and love how it responds but when taking pics inside a church or whatever, it feels like I have ever to stand miles back to get the into the pic. Obviously 30mm is better for this I'm guessing?

Who knew picking lenses was so hard
 
On APS-C, my experience of the difference between 30mm and 50mm is:
  • 30/35mm - WYSIWYG, when you lift the camera to your eye the image is pretty mich exactly as you've seen it
  • 50mm - take three steps backwards, the view through the viewfinder tends to be a lot narrower than your eye has seen
You'll find a lot of comments on the forum about the 50mm on APS-C cameras, it's cheap and fast but it can be an awkward focal length - too short for separation with portraits, too long as a walkabout.

I personally find that 30mm-ish and 85mm-ish are the ideal focal lengths for APS-C, 50mm has its uses but these are very limited compared to 30mm. My Sigma 30/1.4 is a fantastic lens.
 
I had the 50 and now I have the 35. (Sony vs Nikon, both 1.8's) The 35 is a much better FOV on crop for me. Would still like a wider prime, but the jump in price means that won't be happening anytime soon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top