Sigma 30mm F/1.4 EX DC HSM

First off, I want to "Thank" all of you that are really helping so many of us newbies to learn about this

wonderful hobby of Photography. I realize that we/I may ask questions that seem so easy to those of

you in the know. What is tough is when a question is asked, if it is phrased just a little different than

what we had in out minds then we just don't "get it ".

 

Now onto my question. I've seen the lens above listed for $400.00. Is this a good all around piece of

glass to have. I have looked around and can't find out if Nikon makes a similar one or Tamron for

comparison. I have a Nikon D40 that came with 2 "kit" lenses, 18-55 and 55-200. This is about the

amount of money that I can spend on this. I am looking at a lens that could be used for group shots,

portraits, I guess just about anything. I absolutely want to have the auto focus and metering available.

 

Am I looking at the right thing. What would a 30mm be best used for?

Any other suggestions without talking about "Pro" glass. I am sure that there are many of us out here

in the same class that just can't afford those.

Thank You,

Phil

For the moment, that lens remains (for your use on a D40) essentially unique. It would serve you very well for group shots, but may be just a little short for portraits (a longer focal length can be more flattering). 30mm is, on your camera, the "standard" field of view. It's going to present things (with the bounds of your frame) in roughly the same porportions that you're seeing with your own eyes. As such, you can very quickly know - without the camera to your face - whether or not you're going to need to back up a pace to get the whole group in, etc.

 

Here's a good test for you. Set your current zoom to 30mm, and don't change it. For a week. Shoot a lot, completely skipping over any concern about the fact that you're a few stops slower. Just concentrate on the way your subjects are fitting into the frame, and on what you need to do to get your and your camea in the right position at that focal length. If that starts appealing to you, you know you're on the right track.

 

I have that lens, and I like it a great deal. You just can't beat having a lens that fast for certain situations. But remember that when you're that wide open (f/1.4), depth of field is VERY shallow. It's quick to focus, and very sharp in the center when wide open, and very sharp corner-to-corner when stopped down even a little. It's a solid, substantial-feeling lens which you'd be glad to own. But since you have the ability, right now, to experience life at 30mm, force yourself to for a while. It will be very illuminating.

You'll get a lot of opinions on this one, so my advice is to look whether the poster is a

photographer who takes photographs or a, well, Internet poster. I happen to love this

lens for specific situations. It makes a very good street shooting lens because the field

of view (equal to 45mm in film terms) is almost ideal (for me, many people like wider),

and the fast aperture allows for a lot of low light and selective depth of field shooting. In

real world use f/1.4 is awfully shallow but useable IF you account for the fact that your

focus field is really a few inches deep when shooting a few feet away. F/1.8 and f/2 are

very useable. <p>Since you already have a sharp walkabout lens, the 18-55, the

Sigma wouldn't give you anything in terms of sharpness, but would, of course, greatly

expand your ability to shoot in low light. It is a much bigger and heavier lens than the

kit lens, and given the size of the D40 I think you would feel like the body is somewhat

out of balance. I use mine on a D300, on which it balances nicely.<p>The distinctions

between "pro" and "non-pro" glass are often meaningless. "Pro" glass (i.e. expensive)

may be better constructed, and may have an extra stop or two available to you. At f/4

to f/11 I guarantee you will not notice any degree of difference in terms of sharpness in

a print between your kit lens and a $1500 Nikkor 18-55 /2.8. <p>As far as your last

question, whether the 30mm Sigma is right for you in terms of field of view, you can

already set your kit lens at 30mm and see for yourself what it will look like. Now

imagine what having 4 extra stops will do for you.

Hi Phil, I have had the sigma 30mm/F1.4 for the last 8 months. Lots have been said about it in various forums, the good and the bad. I love this lens in that it fulfills for me my need for a fast normal prime lens on my D70s. I have the Sigma 10-20mm, the 18-135 nikon, and the 70-300 VR. All excellent lenses very good to excellent IQ. Specially the 18-135 is sharp sharp sharp. Though has bad vignetting at 18mm/3.5 but fixed easily in photo shop. All these lenses being slow are useless at dawn & dusk street photography or for use indoors w/o flash and sports. This Sigma 30mm (45mm on 1.5 APS sensor) fills in the gap beautifully and gives spectacular results. IQ is just outstanding, brialliant. Its well built chunky and has a very fast HSM AF. On nikon models you just grab the manual focus ring no switches. Optically I have found it to be as sharp as any nikon prime, very little or no light fall off, practically very little or no CA very little distortion <1%. Excellent color rendition and saturation. Good contrast. No flare so far. Compared to Nikkor lenses the 30mm sigma as well as the 10-20mm Sigma gives kind of more delicate photographs, cant really explain but you can say more creamy and less harsh. I like them. It is extremely easy to use from F2 onwards, but very tricky at F1.4. Users have blamed it for front focus problems, most likely it is user error most of the time. At F1.4 if you focus on the nose the ears become soft its DOF is razor thin out there. I have found that my AFS centre sensor focus point is at the extreme left edge of the centre sensor so I point that way now, all problems solved. The D70s meter tends to overexpose by around .7 EV with this lens, thats ok easily fixed. This front focus error cribbing is too much in all forums, what I found was that if you take a photo from 15 inches at F1.4 then possibly you find this problem, but mostly it is a camera problem of AFS. How ever in real life photography I have had no problems. This is not a close up or portrait lens. For portraits you might like to look at the cheap but outstanding Nikon 50mm/1.8 or the more expensive Nikon 50/1.4. Sigma has now also introduced the 50/1.4. When shooting from 1.4 to 1.8 corners are soft. Corner softness does not really matter in practical photography at 1.4. All in all an excellent lens, excellent for what it is meant for, low light hand held photography. For sports, indoors w/o flash, travel photographs of streets, shop fronts, people at dawn, dusk and night. This is a very fast lens of excellent IQ when used for what it is made for. I got mine from Sigma4less for 368 USD plus UPS ground charges. Hope this helps. Cheers

If you don't need the f1.4 speed (for night photos) or very shallow depth of field, I don't see the lens really doing anything for you that your 18-55mm doesn't already. Again, if you aren't taking night photos or lots of indoor no-flash photos etc., you might be better off buying the new VR version of the 18-55mm that is out now.

 

 

Kent in SD

This lens is known for its incredible center sharpness wide open but it also has a very curved field, meaning that no matter how far down you stop the lens the corners never really become sharp, making it great for close portraits but not so good for groups where you want everyone in the frame to be in focus. Here are two good tests that show this:

 

1. http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Canon%20EOS%20Lens%20Tests/45-canon-eos-aps-c/298-sigma-af-30mm-f14-ex-hsm-dc-test-report--review

 

2. http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/176/cat/30

Sorry Ajay, the front focus errors associated with this lens are no illusion and are not "user error" (frankly, you have some nerve to suggest this), they are quite real, and Sigma will admit this if asked. My own copy of this lens front focused quite distinctly and I had to send it to Sigma for correction. The people at Sigma made no effort to deny the fact that this has been a frequent problem with this lens (and also some others).

 

Once the problem was fixed (at no charge, of course) the lens is an excellent performer. Even wide open the results are quite satisfactory in real-world situations (as opposed to test targets).

Hi Douglas! Sorry on that but I said most of the times. It is not that I have the nerve but I would put it "limited experience" Our group here in India has 46 of these lenses and only 2 front focussed. Those 2 also were ok but errors were due to the user not getting the hang of using it at 1.4 and real close. Though you are absolutely right that a few lenses do have front focussing problems. However this lens has been much maligned in many fora. This detracts users from obtaining this beautiful piece of glass at a very affordable price. Specially as nikon doesn't have anything comparable which can be used on their DSLR's requiring HSM/SWM. Mike I would not go too much by tests, though I respect slrgear and photozone tests for their thoroughness. In real life use I have found that stepped down a few stops I dont find any noticible distortion in group shots or gatherings. This lens as far as I have experienced is an excellent performer.

<a href=" title="DSC_9906 by daarkfire, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3221/2441644726_28ef68d7c0.jpg" width="500" height="500" alt="DSC_9906" /></a>

The lens has my vote. I didn't see landscape mentioned- I used it last week for some airial photography with great results.

Phil,

 

I have been quite pleased with this lens. It is quite fast which is great for indoor low light situations where you would rather not use flash. Here is a recent example, indoors, available light at 1/30, f5, iso 800 on a D300.<div></div>

You're probably better off with a Nikon 35mm lens as a 50mm focal length equivalent -- almost as fast, sharper, and bought used a lot cheaper.

NF: Sure, a Nikon 35/2 or so would be nice... except that it won't autofocus on Phil's camera, and in the lower light in which you might often want to use such a lens, and with the resulting shallow depth of field that makes focus so critical, that can be hard to handle with that small viewfinder.