Sigma 30mm F1.4 Mini Review
I plan on writing a more complete review of the Sigma 30mm F1.4 with examples and what not sometime over the next couple of weeks, but I thought I post a couple of thoughts on it now.
Pros
- Right focal length; depending on your DSLR 30mm works out ot 45mm or 48mm.
- Big max aperture; you can’t argue with 1.4.
- Good performance wide open; it’s not a Sumilux, but it’s also not $3000.
- Right price; $400 for a fast standard is not all that far off what Nikon an Canon charge for their 50 F1.4s.
- Fast, quiet AF motor; especially nice since neither Canon nor Nikon’s similarly priced 35′s offer an AF motor.
- Pleasant OOF rendering.
- Contrasty and pretty neutral color cast.
Cons
- Size; it’s pretty big. 62mm is a big front element. With the hood it’s down right huge.
- Flare; yeah, you really do need that big hood fairly frequently.
- Barrel distortion; add $15 for a copy of PTLens to the purchase price.
- AF errors reported by some users; mine is fine, but Sigma continues to be dogged by a reputation for sample variation. Of course Nikon and Canon have also had problems with sample variation on some of their lenses.
In my mind the Sigma competes against Canon’s 28 F1.8, Canon’s 35 F2, Canon’s 35 F1.4, Nikon’s 35 F2, Nikon’s 28 F1.4. Both the other F1.4 lenses are pricey to say the least, and Nikon’s is also currently out of production. I’ve used the Canon 28 1.8 and the Nikon 35 F2. Both are fine options and available slightly cheaper than the Sigma. Neither is quite as fast, and in my experience, neither produces images that have quite the same snap as the Sigma particularly when wide open.
Conclusion
The Sigma 30mm F1.4 is on paper superior to similarly priced offerings from the camera manufacturers. Unlike a lot of 3rd party lenses, the on paper specs actually translate into good perfromance. AF is snappy and sure. Sharpness is good wide open. Images show a lot contrast and snap without particularly nasty rendering of OOF areas. It’s a little big for standard lens, but it’s much smaller than Nikon or Canon’s F1.4 offerings in this focal range. I’d like to see Sigma produce something like a 24mm F1.4 with similar performance.
Wrong focal length for some. 30 = 60 on fourthirds cameras. It has a following, but 60mm puts a lot of people off.
60 is a bit long, although it isn’t that different from the 55 and 58 lenses that were common on the early SLRs. You 4/3 folks do have that 25 f1.4 coming from panasonic though. If it materializes, that might be a really nice lens. The sigma is kind of big for what it is.
A lot of people are putting a lot of faith in that Leicasonic to be. Can’t imagine it will be small though.
My ideal ‘normal’ lens is a bit wider than 50mm equiv. I used to use a 40mm on my Pentax SLR and now I use a 40mm on my Minolta rangefinder.
It’s funny how we get into these habits.
Guess you were right about the size of it.
http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00IChE&tag=
I am considering this lens for indoor sports on my E-1. Some have mentioned that it might not be fast enough AF-wise. I might also use it with TC 1.4, have you any idea how that would work? I really need a fast “85MM” for indoor volleyball.
Raymond, it’s hard to say what the performance would be combined with the teleconverter, but I’d not think that the lens would be the limiting factor. The sigma HSM focussing motor works well. On the D80 it’s fast, accurate and quiet.
Doesn’t olympus make a 50 f2? With an E1 that would probably be my first choice for indoor sports.
[...] Flare and the Sigma 30mm F1.4 I mentioned in my mini review of the Sigma 30mm that flare was a potential issue with this lens. At the time all I had noticed was the occasional aperture blade pattern. Veiling flare has now reared its head: [...]
This is really a glorious lens. I use it all the time and astound people with my shots. 1.4 is great, 30 on a DSLR is more frequently usable than 50.
Of course, for even less money you can get another glorious lens, the Nikkor 50 1.4 or 1.8 (I find them both equal, perhaps slightly preferring the 1.8). But 50 really means 75 or so, which is much too tight for a lot of stuff.
Glorious might be going a bit too far for this lens. After a few months, it feels just a bit too clinical.
Do you think the SiGMA 30 mm is usable on a EOS 5D?
or should I buy the EF35 1.4 L?