sigma 28/1.8 Macro as normal for d50

[mikeivnitsky]

how good is it as a budget solution?

[mikeivnitsky]

It is also aspherical.

[dan park]

I just picked up a nikon 28/2.8 for 189 (paid about 30 too much for it but a guys got to eat right) at my local camera store to use as a normal low light walk around lens for my d50. So far it seems to be a pretty sharp lens. The autofocus is horrible as compared to my 24-85 af-d lens and it hunts and pecks in low light. But it is 2 stops faster than my zoom and wider angle than my 50/1.8 so I'll keep it around for a while.

[dan_brown4]

I think the Sigma is a decent lens, I've heard it's a bit soft wide open, but that 's no big

deal. Just shoot it stopped down a bit and you'll be fine, plus, you'll have the brighter

viewfinder and the better AF performance.

 

OTOH, I'd take a 35mm/f2.0D-AF Nikkor over it for a budget lens.

[robert_marotz]

I have the Sigma 28mm f1.8 EX DG Aspherical Macro myself and the "softness" problem I think is generally from focus errors. This lens and a few other Sigma lenses are notorious for wacky AF performance, sometimes not focusing at all, sometimes backfocusing, sometimes dead on...

 

When the focus is correct, it's a pretty sharp lens wide open and when stopped down it outresolves my D70 handily...here's a pic wide-open:

http://www.tc.umn.edu/~maro0049/maitest45.jpg

 

Because of the AF inconsistency and sample variation with this Sigma, if you don't want to go through a few samples to find "the right one" for you, it would be much better to swing for a Nikkor 35mm f2. Added benefit is the 52mm filter and much more convenient size than the monstrious Sigma.

[robert_marotz]

Oh and a size comparison with my 45mm f2.8P...

[soeren_engelbrecht1]

I have the first version of this lens (58 mm filter thread, aspherical, but no "macro" designation). Very, very nice, fairly compact (about the size of a Nikkor 50/1.4) and I have had very good results with sharpness. I use it extensively, and it was the only lens I had on my D70 when our daughter was born.

<p>

<center>

<img src=http://www.altomasta.dk/kap2_eksamen.jpg height=131>

<p>

<img src=http://www.altomasta.dk/kap2_nummerplade.jpg height=140>

</center>

<p>

Highly recommended.

<p>

I do agree that the new version (77 mm filter thread) is a lot less handy.

[chris.townsend]

I had the latest 28/1.8 and HATED it. It was big and I didn't like the color cast at all. The focus was loud and slow too. When I used the custom white balance it was just fine. I returned it and got the Sigma 30mm 1.4 (which has been wonderful) because I didn't want to have to set a custom white balance every single time to get rid of the color cast. I also really wanted that uber large max aperture that the 30mm f/1.4 has for available light shots which has been a lot of fun.

<br/><br/>

I've used the Nikon 28 f/2.8 and it is a wonderful lens. If the 2.8 if fast enough for you then by all means, it is an inexpensive 'normal' on a DSLR and makes a great little lens that is very light and fast focusing as well as very sharp. It can be had, used in good condition, for a very low price too.

<br/><br/>

If the color cast doesn't bother you then the Sigma 28/1.8 is an OK lens. If you can swing it, you will love the Sigma 30mm f/1.4. The 28/1.8 focused fine for me most of the time and was sharp, however, the color cast was a weird brownish or yellowish tint that I just didn't like at all. Some people love the Sigma 28/1.8 so it must just boil down to personal taste for the most part.

<br/><br/>

Cheers and have fun checking out new lenses!