Sigma 28mm or 30mm?
I’m looking a two Sigma primes (28mm f1.8 EX DG Aspherical Macro and 30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM) to primarily shoot artwork (paintings in galleries and studios). This usually requires low-light capabilities. I have a 50mm f1.4 HSM Sigma for that as well and so far I love it but it is a little close cropped for some of the paintings. As an aside, I like to shoot landscapes and family stuff (indoors) so the lens will be multipurpose.
I’ve done a long search here and found mixed reviews on the 30mm. Elsewhere on the net I also see some test shots that show pin cushioning (I think that’s the term?) on the corners and edges. Then there’s the fact that it’s a DC lens. Even though I plan to stay with my Nikon D90, $400+/- for a good prime might last longer than the camera. Who knows what I’ll move to next.
The 28mm is not HSM but I have no idea if that matters. Both my current lenses are and they work well for me. The difference between f1.4 and f1.8 seems negligible but I think the DG size is a plus.
The 30mm costs about $100 more than the 28mm.
Is there a reason to go with the 30mm over the 28mm?
I’ve done a long search here and found mixed reviews on the 30mm. Elsewhere on the net I also see some test shots that show pin cushioning (I think that’s the term?) on the corners and edges. Then there’s the fact that it’s a DC lens. Even though I plan to stay with my Nikon D90, $400+/- for a good prime might last longer than the camera. Who knows what I’ll move to next.
The 28mm is not HSM but I have no idea if that matters. Both my current lenses are and they work well for me. The difference between f1.4 and f1.8 seems negligible but I think the DG size is a plus.
The 30mm costs about $100 more than the 28mm.
Is there a reason to go with the 30mm over the 28mm?
A Nikon D90 plus some Nikon, Sigma & Tokina lenses.
0
Comments
Nikon D200 with MB-D200
Nikkor 50mm f/1.8
Tamron 90mm SP Di Macro
Sigma 18-50mm
Sigma AF 70-200mm 2.8 DG APO HSM
No idea how to use them but learning more everyday.
On a Nikon body, the AF on the 28mm is actually a bit quieter and the difference in the AF performance between the two maybe less as was what I saw when a buddy had it for his Nikon d200 (it uses the screw drive on Nikon mounts). On the Canon body, the 30mm is much quieter and faster.
Here is my comparison of the two for the Canon mount.
http://tomyi.smugmug.com/gallery/2000895_jMDFd#114325968_EywF2
Seems like a split decision between you two.:D
Based mostly upon Tee Why's image comparisons I went for the 28mm. It seemed sharper on the edges and equally sharp in the center for most of the tests.
Mine arrives tomorrow fro B&H so I look forward to a weekend of testing.
Nikon D200 with MB-D200
Nikkor 50mm f/1.8
Tamron 90mm SP Di Macro
Sigma 18-50mm
Sigma AF 70-200mm 2.8 DG APO HSM
No idea how to use them but learning more everyday.
― Edward Weston
It's AF on a Canon is bad, b/c the motor they use is bad. On a Nikon mount they use the screw drive system so it's nicer. It is made for a full frame so the corners are sharper imo than the 30mm f1.4 which is made for a cropped sensor (go figure, a fast wide/normal prime with soft corners, gasp :P).
The 28mm is also very big and the front element extends out as you focus. The 30mm does not and it's HSM motor is faster and quieter and probably will focus better in dark settings. The 28mm can focus so close that you can actually touch the hood on the subject and still focus if you are shooting just to the side and not shooting directly at the subject. It also has more aperture blades at 9 for a rounder bokeh rendering.
If you intend to stand relatively far away and take portraits and such in low light settings, the 30mm may be better, but if you want a cheap prime that you can use to get close focusing shots, walking around shots, and some low light shots (may need to MF at times), the 28mm is tough to beat for the price IMO.
Distortion is how the image is distorted. The field curvature is how the
plane of the depth of field is "bent".
Consider a flat wall. If you photograph that wall in an 90° angle a lens with
strong field curvature will only show the center sharp and the edges soft
because the edges are not within in the depth of field. A lens with flat field
curvature will show the whole wall in sharp.
― Edward Weston
I finally found a tiled floor but left my tripod home.
Therefore the parallax is off a bit. I'm standing on a tall stool and using the florescent lighting that was in the hallway. I made no attempt to adjust the image except a little levels work.
When I bring it into Photoshop and put guides on it I see the parallax error due to the camera orientation. I can imagine what it would look like had I been lined up properly by splitting the difference on the right side. This makes me think that the distortion is very slight.
I'm sorry that this is such a poor test.
Either way, I'm mostly happy with the lens. It seems quiet enough. I do slightly miss the freedom of manual focus in the way my 50mm HSM lens does (no need to flip the manual/auto switch on that one).
Overall, I think it was worth the money and am glad I didn't spend the extra money on the 30mm.
Somewhere I read that the macro aspect was much closer than the stated specs. I agree. Setting the front of the lens on the table and tilting it 45 degrees yields a very, very close shot.