Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM

I bought this lens after looking at the Nikon 35mm 1.8 & the Sigma 30mm 1.4. I went with the Sigma due to being able to shoot at the wider aperture. I heard a lot about sigmas QC issues and this lens was one of those. It wasn't sharp at all at 1.4 until it was acceptable at 2.8 or so. It also had back focus issues, especially in backlit/low light situations.

I sent the lens off for a warranty repair, and its better now. Shooting at 1.4/1.8 is acceptable when shooting portraits, since I find the little bit of softness the lens has works well for my style of portraits. The lens still hunts on my D300 in low light/backlit situations. When using anything other than the center focus point the focusing is worse.

When the lens gets the focus the images are fantastic. I am still somewhat debating on whether to sell the lens & pick up the Nikon, but as of now I'll keep it.

1.4 aperture is handy in low light situations
Feels pretty solid

Lens hunts for focus in low light/backlit situations
Not as sharp at 1.8/1.4 as I'd wish.

Tokina 12-24
Nikon 35mm 2.8 (manual focus)

I've used Sigma's customer service a couple times, and have had mixed results with them. My TC that I sent in was fixed & returned quickly, while my 70-200 went missing for a few days.

I wantedt to comment on a couple of things that keep cropping up.
1) Focussing problems. I had a d80 and found this lens hard to focus, ended up always taking 3 shots and ususally ended up with one sharply in focus. But not always. I persisted because the results were superb. I then traded up to a D300 and the focussing problems ahve gone away, the D80 did tend to back focus which I could probably have gotten calibrated at nikon. The D300 focusses this lens very well. I never use manual focus, alwasy "spot" focussing and this lens is just fantastic.

2) Many people say this lens is a big soft wide open and best around f2 or even f3. I just don't agree with this - for the obvious reason that the DOF is so shallow, you only get one small plane of view in focus - focus on someone's eyes in a portrait, and its true to say a lot of the head will be out of focus. This is a possitive not a negative.
I find on the d300 and I almost always use it wide open, its extermely sharp.

Buy it, you'll be amazed at teh shots you can take even by candlelight, especially on tthe higher iso settings of the D300

I don't know of any at all especially at this price.

I was looking for lens with approximately the field of view of the "normal" 50mm, so I decided to bet on Sigma. Since I´ve already have a 105 Macro EX, wich I love, I thought it´s worth a try.

Very nice! I loved! Sharp, fast, beautiful lens for use even in some professionall applications.

I´ve some samples, just resized, in my Flickr album (http://flickr.com/cwpaiva)

After all, a picture is worth 1000 words!

Construction, quality of image, contrast, sharpness and bokeh

Due to great aperture, find correct focus is sometimes difficult. But this more a characteristic than a weakness.

Nikon 50mm f/1.4, Nikon 50mm/1.8 and Nikon 35mm f/2.0

Didn´t use yet.

In the analog era the lens I mostly used was the 50mm 1.4 (Olympus OM series). I followed 1,5 years of photo art education and I was only allowed to use a 50mm prime. That was my best lesson to learn photography, because it will teach you to compose your picture with more attention than you would do with a zoom. You learn to walk back and forward until you get what you were looking for. You can concentrate yourself on the image and on the image alone. What is even more important is that you will find out that it's not that easy to make a good 50mm photo which draws attention to itself. But my practising over and over again I learned that skill. When I started with photography a long time ago I started with a zoom lens and I never had those pictures that I have now, purely by using only 1 prime lens for all your photography. After you've learned that skill, it's save to buy other primes and even zoom lenses. From my experience, by first buying 1 prime lense and later more prime lenses or zoom lenses, my photos have improved in time.

Only one month ago I decided to buy my first Digital SLR (I waited because of the price drop in years and the drawbacks of the first era of DSLR's. So I bought a Nikon D80 (I still can't find and drawback in it's design after a month of full testing everything!!) and a Sigma 30mm 1.4. Since two weeks I also bought a Nikon 60mm 2.8D micro for my macro-photography and the wonderful topzoom Nikon 35-70 2.8.
With this last lens I have, converted to digital format, a 50 mm, a portrait lens (75-100 mm) and a macro lens all in one, and with the quality that comes very close to prime lenses. Today I returned the Sigma 30mm 1.4. Why? I'll tell you:

First of all: it was a difficult decision to bring it back, because it is a great lense. I had no focus problems as mentioned in lots of articles. I'm convinced that a lot of the focus problems are not the fault of the lense but of the photographer behind it. Focussing with a 1.4 lens can be pretty difficult, especially on 1.4. The depth of field is so narrow, that even the slightest change in the focus ring is the difference between sharp and not sharp at all. To focus perfectly on 1.4 you need lots of time to practice. I have used the 50mm 1.4 Olympus for years and my eyesight is great, but even with this experience it was not that easy to produce sharp photos over and over again. First, using the autofocus doesn't guarantee a sharp photo. To get the sharpest photo, especially if your focus object is within 2 meter distance of the camera, you need to go to manual focussing. Most camera's have an electronic distance meter, that will show a dot in the viewfinder when it thinks it has focussed on the AF-area. It's best to use only the middle focus point in AF-mode. So when you are manual focussing and the dot pops op in your viewfinder, you should have a sharp focus on that middle AF-point. When taking pictures this way, you probably get sharper pictures than when using the AF-mode. But even in the manual mode with the dot in the viewfinder, the object is sometimes not sharp enough. I had regular moments that I had to take 3 pictures, review them in the play mode by zooming in maximum, before my object what tack sharp. But when I had that sharp picture, it was REALLY SHARP. And this trial and error not only happend on 1.4 but also on smaller apertures (till let's say 5.6). So bear this in mind when using a 1.4 lense: it really takes practice.

Second: one of the reasons to buy a 1.4 lens is the fact that my viewfinder is incredibly clear, and you really need this clear viewfinder if you want to manual focus on such large apertures. Well, the viewfinder was VERY CLEAR. It was a delight to have such a bright viewfinder, since most consumer and semi-professional DSLR's have a viewfinder which is darker than the viewfinders in de analog era.
But I made one mistake when I bought this lense: I thought that by buying a 30mm 1.4 lens that would be converted to 45 mm in digital format, I would get the same sort of view in the viewfinder that I had with my Olympus OM camera with 50mm 1.4 lens. How stupid I was. No, you get the view in your viewfinder of a 30 mm wide lens. The viewfinder of a DSLR is already much smaller than in the analog camera's and the 30mm effect created even a smaller effect. So imagine a analog camera with a 28mm on it and try to focus manually: that will be hard, since all objects appear notably smaller than what you see in real life. This made manual focussing further than 2 meters very difficult, especially if the ground glass you are focussing on is a bright and clear one: you think the object is sharp, but wait till you review your picture. With objects closer than 2 meter it is still possible to see what is sharp or not.
When I compare this focussing with the zoomlens Nikon 35-70 2.8 on the camera and ths zoom put on 35mm, focussing was much easier and much more accurate. I think that's because it's a 35 mm and not a 30mm. These small differences in mm with wide lenses can give a huge difference in view. 35mm has always been a wide lens which has most in common with the standard 50mm. The view is somewhat wider, but it doesn't give you the feeling as if you have glasses on that are not completed calibrated to your eyes. So if you also happen to be wear glassed, like me, this effect can increase.

I think that using a 50mm lens on a DSLR, gives the most natural eyesight in the viewfinder, followed by a 35mm and then by a 30mm. The disadvantage of a 50 mm is that it won't be a standard lense in digital photography, but more a small tele. To get a building inside your frame means that you have to take 100 steps back. So the 35 mm will be a better solution.

Today, when I returned the 30mm 1.4, I bought the 50mm 1.4, because I want a 1.4 lens and I already have a 35mm 2.8 on my zoom lens. This zoom lens is of professional quality and costs only 250-400 euro's second hand. Nothing compared to the 24-70 2.8, which is very expensieve and bulky. Paying 375 euro's for a 35mm with one extra stop was something I would not do right now. First I am going to use these two lenses and if I'm still in need of that extra stop in the future, I will decide then. With the 50mm 1.4 I now have a great portrait lens and a lense which I can use when the light dims and dims.

Do read the weaknesses, there may be one you didn't think about!
All in all: this is a great lense that Nikon hasn't made yet. So until Nikon comes with the equivalent, there is no real competition. But the Equivalent of Nikon will be far more expensive

-You have 1.4 when you need it
- It's a real allround prime lense
- It's very sharp
- It's well built
- It has good contrast
- You got a bit more depth of field than the 35mm
- You got manual override in AF-mode, which means that when you press the release button half way and keep it that way, you can turn the ring and do the final stage of sharpening
- It''s heavy, which means that you can hold you camera more still, which results in sharper pictures when compared to the light 35mm: you get an image stabiliser for free!
- A hood is included: not with the 35mm
- The HSM silent motor is really silent (though it makes a little mouse sound sometimes!). Can be important when making photo's of insects etc.
- It has internal focussing: so your lens won't get longer when you focus. Can be important if you are making photo's of insects etc.
- front focus ring doesn't turn around when using the AF-system: I think the 35mm does, which
- The focus ring is larger than with the 35mm

- More difficult with manual focussing, especially when you focus 2 meter or further
- Focussing on 1.4 requires lots of practice
- Don't always trust the auto focus: better use the manual focus with the Assist-Dot.
- The sigma has got an annoying problem with my Nikon D80. When my AF is in AF-C or AF-A position (which means that the camera follows moving objects during AF), you can't use manual override by turning the focus ring. When you turn the focus ring, the internal motor will function too, which can destroy the motor of your camera or lense!
- The big lense blocks the AF-assist light!
- When shooting in bright light or sunlight, watch out for purple fringing. I have quite some photo's with trees that seem to become purple around there edges.
- When it gets dark, it seems like the photo gets a small red glow in it. But I'm not for sure if this is a white balance problem or lense problem
- When using a large aperture, in combination with low light, the contrast is good, though not as excellent as all my other Nikon lenses.
- You cannot use this lense for 35mm photography

Nikon 35-70 2.8D
Nikon 50mm 1.4 (only 1 day used and I am thrilled with the results)

Not needed

Of all the Nikkor prime lenses I've used, this 3rd party prime lens has been by far the sharpest (and fastest) lens I've used and still currently own. At 30mm on a 1.5x crop factor sensor of my D80, this becomes a 45mm lens equivalent making it perfect for street photography and general shots. I did the obvious thing when I received my lens, I shot it wide open at f/1.4. This lens puts a new spin to street photography at night WITHOUT a tripod. At f/1.4, image quality in very low light conditions with a minimum shutter speed of 1/30 and an ISO setting of 800 or higher - produced some pretty nice images. When you stop down to about f/1.8 to f/2 under low light conditions, the image quality just seems to improve and sharpness and detail improves. Under normal lighting conditions, this lens seems to be sharpest at f/4 - f/5.6 - I found those stops to be this lens' sweet stop for very very sharp images. The bokeh efffect for this lens is remarkable. I didn't get the same problems/complaints that most of the user reviewers have claimed on reviewing this lens. It works quite well, better than my 85mm f/1.8 Nikkor. I think the only gripe I would have about this lens is that it often at times struggles to focus on a subject or subjects properly. Other than that, this lens is a superb piece of glass and I find it very difficult to take it off my D80 since it's truly that darn good of a lens.

VERY fast lens. At f/1.4 - indoor shots are a charm. Step down to f/1.8 to f/2 - indoor shots are sharper and better. Very sharp lens under normal light conditions too. Very sharp at f/4 - f/5.6 under normal lighting conditions. Bokeh effect is very beautiful.

A little pricey for a 3rd party lens, but then again, for a lens with a max aperture of f/1.4, you can't go wrong! Lens tends to hunt when in AF mode.