Is it wise to buy a 28mm 1.4?

[arnulfo_rosas1]

Considering all the manipulations that can be attained via Photoshop, I wonder

whether a 28/1.4 is a good purchase, as any good 28mm with some

postprocessing could yield the very same results obtained with the fastest 28;

not to mention that in the digital realm 28 is no longer a wide angle. I may

conclude that the 28/1.4 is not a wise investment, however a local store is

selling me a very nice sample at a very tempting $900. Since I already have a

28/2, I would like to learn from your experiences if this is a wise move or

just another case of NAS.

Thanks for your comments!

[eric friedemann]

AR:

 

 

1. Unless you will be shooting for money or know for certain you will be able to sell an item for more than you paid for it, camera equipment is not an "investment"

 

 

2. Having owned a 28mm f/2.0 AIS lens, the 28mm f/1.4 AFD lens is a little better optically in the f/2.0-4.0 range. That having been said, if I didn't own a 28mm f/1.4 and just had to buy an f/1.4 lens in that range for DSLRs, it would be the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 for its price and high-speed focus motor.<div></div>

[ellis_vener_photography]

Are you a photo-journalist who often wishes you had the extra 1 stop larger aperture?

[fourfa]

my experience has been that if you get pro-quality used gear for a good price in good condition, and keep it in good condition, it's essentially free. Perhaps not an economist's definition of investment, but as far as gear goes it's not the worst place to store your money. I don't think you'd have much trouble reselling that lens for more than $900.

 

I use a 35mm f1.4 on FF, not too different from the 42mm-e of 28 on 1.5, and I almost never take it off f1.4. Not because I need the extra shutter speed, but because the depth of field is so great with wide angle lenses that you need a huge aperture if you want to significantly blur a close background. Some testing in the store (think environmental portraiture) will tell you if you find the difference between the 1.4 and 2.0 worth $900.

[ShunCheung]

Unless this used lens is in poor condition (well worn, dings on the glass ...), $900 seems to be a good deal. Some people are now paying over the $1700 former new price for a used one, but that may be part of the eBay craziness.

 

If you need the speed, one stop is significant, but do you really need a 1.4?

 

While we are on this topic, how good is the Sigma 30mm/f1.4?

[lou korell]

Using "wisdom" and "should I buy this lens" in the same sentence! Interesting :)

 

If you need it, yes. If you don't, it's purely up to you. I've heard great things about the Sigma 30 1.4 and it probably is much more affordable. Most people I know who use the Sigma rave about it. Try them both out and pick your favorite....oh, and be practical about the money difference..yeah, right. :)

 

Whenever referring to lens buying, substitute the word "wisdom" for "Lust" Isn't that what buying lenses is all about?

 

 

Lou

[robert_finkelman]

I own one, and find it to be worth the premium price tag, provided it is a lens that you really need. It will pay for itself in due time if you are a pro landscape photog. If you are more of an ameture, I would thiink it would be a bit of overkill. Furthermore, I wish you good luck finding a new one anywhere!

 

Rob

[davebecker]

For night cityscapes it is essential. I certainly would not consider it a landscape lens as I believe a previous contributor described it. It is in fact designed to gather every bit of available light. I've used mine at night to photograph Tokyo,Hong Kong and New York. There is nothing like it and it is every bit as revelant on a digital body as when used with a film camera. A great walk around lens for evening photography. Also very useful for astrophotography - either film or digital. Certainly worth the big bucks.

Regards,

Dave

[chris_chow]

NO, its not a wise buy. Tell me the name of the shop, in private, of course.

[chansonbleu]

In regards to Shun's question of how good is the Sigma 30mm1.4 I have owned the lens for a couple of months and I am pleased with it. The only other Nikon glass I own is the 18-70mm kit lens that came with my D70, and the 70-300G so I really don't have anything comprable to compare it with.

 

The build quality is very good and it focuses fast and silently. It is plenty sharp and the color seems to be a bit more neutral and less saturated than my kit lens. My film camera is a Contax RTS II and I use the 50mm 1.4 Planar for low light shooting. I felt I needed a fast normal lens for digital and the Sigma was the affordable choice. Having said that I hated paying $450. for an aftermarket normal focal length lens. I could have bought 2 used 1.4 Planars for that, and the Planar is no slouch.

 

Here is a sample shot at 1.4 posted on an earlier thread. It shows the OOF rendering.

 

Regards

Steve

[ShunCheung]

Steve, thanks for the info on the Sigma.

[kurt zhao]

28mm 1.4 is a really nice lens, I love it, though price is a bit expensive.