I just did a quick set of comparisons shots between the 30/2.8 and the kit zoom on a tripod. I'll expand this in a thread with some detailed examples when I have time, but a few things stood out:
- first off, the kit lens is really quite solid around this focal length, and it will remain the top convenience choice for many. With its stabilization, it will also be a better choice for handheld video. I seldom use zooms anyway, but this is probably the best kit lens I've ever used. I still feel that the it is competitive with virtually all legacy 28/2.8 lenses, and only beaten by the very best.
- the kit lens is very close to matching the 30/2.8 for central sharpness at the same f-stops. In fact, it's close to matching it across most of the frame. At f/5.6 or f/8, even the edges of the frame are excellent with the kit lens, though the 30/2.8 is consistently a hair better.
- the kit lens can never catch the 30/2.8 at the corners. In fact, the 30/2.8 is better in the corners at f/2.8 than the zoom is at f/8. Really.
- the 30/2.8 is easily usable at f/2.8, especially in the closer range. It sharpens up quickly when stopping down -- in fact, f/3.2 is a major improvement over f/2.8. That is a very big deal -- nice! From f/3.2 to f/8 it steadily improves, but on a very flat curve. Honestly, you can shoot this lens at any aperture, and simply make your decision based on DOF, shutter speed, etc., without worrying much about anything.
The 30/2.8 seems perfectly matched to the NEX. Fantastic lens.
Smiert Spionam wrote:
I just did a quick set of comparisons shots between the 30/2.8 and the kit zoom on a tripod. I'll expand this in a thread with some detailed examples when I have time, but a few things stood out:
- first off, the kit lens is really quite solid around this focal length, and it will remain the top convenience choice for many. With its stabilization, it will also be a better choice for handheld video. I seldom use zooms anyway, but this is probably the best kit lens I've ever used. I still feel that the it is competitive with virtually all legacy 28/2.8 lenses, and only beaten by the very best.
- the kit lens is very close to matching the 30/2.8 for central sharpness at the same f-stops. In fact, it's close to matching it across most of the frame. At f/5.6 or f/8, even the edges of the frame are excellent with the kit lens, though the 30/2.8 is consistently a hair better.
- the kit lens can never catch the 30/2.8 at the corners. In fact, the 30/2.8 is better in the corners at f/2.8 than the zoom is at f/8. Really.
- the 30/2.8 is easily usable at f/2.8, especially in the closer range. It sharpens up quickly when stopping down -- in fact, f/3.2 is a major improvement over f/2.8. That is a very big deal -- nice! From f/3.2 to f/8 it steadily improves, but on a very flat curve. Honestly, you can shoot this lens at any aperture, and simply make your decision based on DOF, shutter speed, etc., without worrying much about anything.
The 30/2.8 seems perfectly matched to the NEX. Fantastic lens....Show more →
When I owned the NEX-5, I was actually very impressed with it's performance for a kit zoom. Like you say, in it's middle focal range, it's really good.
That said, one area which I did find the kit lacking - compared to more expensive glass - was in color and contrast. Have you noticed a big difference between the Sig and the Kit in that regard?
Yup, it's on the NEX-7. I don't know if I've got an extra good 18-55, but I really can't find much at all to quibble with. I probably shouldn't oversell it, since I'm probably going to put it up for sale (my 50/1.8 shipped today from Amazon) -- but I think the images speak for themselves.
I haven't really noticed major differences between the two in terms of color or contrast. The Sigma is probably a little better on both counts, but the difference seems well within the range of processing adjustments.
Aw, heck -- I'm not getting any work done, so I'm off to put up a new thread.
Yeah, in my brief testing, my Sigma 30 at f2.8 seems as sharp or sharper in the corners than my Contax G 35 at f5.6, but I'll have to find time to do a real test.
I think most kit lenses these days are pretty good actually. The Issue with kit lenses is not the image quality but the slow aperture range. Plus most of them are not that great wide open but stop them down a little bit and then they become very good. So that means you have an even slower aperture range in practice. For me the reason to buy the 30mm f2.8 over the kit lens would be a usable f2.8 and smaller size, and not the performance at f5.6
True enough -- though the Sony kit lens is actually pretty darn good wide open, too. Of course, "wide open" at this focal length is f/4, and slower still as you get longer, which gets us back to your point about speed.
From what I've seen of the Sigma 30 it's looking pretty good. Anyone have any idea of how it compares to a Contax G 28? (Which to date is my favorite 28mm lens...)
artd wrote:
From what I've seen of the Sigma 30 it's looking pretty good. Anyone have any idea of how it compares to a Contax G 28? (Which to date is my favorite 28mm lens...)
I haven't compared the two, but, my guess would be that they would have comparable center performance, with the Sigma having better corner performance and more CA, and the Zeiss having more contrast...but, again, that's just a semi-educated guess.
Sounds like a fair guess. I may have to pick up the 30mm for myself and try it out. I've been in love with the G28 ever since I got it, but if I can get similar performance from the Sigma and get the convenience of AF to boot (at half the cost no less!) I may have to consider it a switch...
artd wrote:
Sounds like a fair guess. I may have to pick up the 30mm for myself and try it out. I've been in love with the G28 ever since I got it, but if I can get similar performance from the Sigma and get the convenience of AF to boot (at half the cost no less!) I may have to consider it a switch...
Cool, a comparison of those two lenses would be very interesting.
Hey.
I just got the Sigmarit 19mm and took it out of the box. Looks nicely made. But... I am experiencing something I have never experienced with any lens. Something inside the lens appears to be moving back and forth (or side to side). I am hearing some kind of rattling/shaking in the lens and I can feel the vibration in my hand. Very comparable to how the rubber coated metal ball inside of an old school computer mouse moves. Is this normal?
The manual said something like: "if the lens is detached from camera or the camera power is turned off, the lens may emit a chattering noise." Not exactly sure what they mean by "chattering."
Oh well, I will see if the lens stops doing that when the camera is on. Does not seem like a good design for transpiration.
I suspect the sound likely has something to do with the new AF motor in the lens as it stops once the camera is turned on (when likely the AF motor in the lens is activated).
curious80 wrote:
I think most kit lenses these days are pretty good actually. The Issue with kit lenses is not the image quality but the slow aperture range. Plus most of them are not that great wide open but stop them down a little bit and then they become very good. So that means you have an even slower aperture range in practice. For me the reason to buy the 30mm f2.8 over the kit lens would be a usable f2.8 and smaller size, and not the performance at f5.6
I totally agree with you.....same reason I bought the sigma and would buy another prime in a different focal length .
My Sigma 19 arrived today and I took it for a short test spin. Maybe it's that I had low expectations, but I'm impressed with the lens. The build quality seems quite decent, especially considering the price. The focus ring has a nice smooth feel to it, better than any of the other focus by wire lenses I've used. The "rattle" when the camera is off is a little disconcerting, but hopefully this won't affect the long term performance.
As it was overcast, the light was pretty dull this afternoon, but the sigma turned out nice vibrant colors. Central sharpness is very good at mid apertures. There is clearly some field curvature, which affects the ability to maintain sharpness at the very edges, but I haven't seen anything else for twice this price that does better. It does have lateral CA, but it corrects well in Lightroom. In backlit areas purple fringing shows up near the corners. Not much can be done about that. Despite these flaws, I still think it's a pretty decent performer. Looking forward to shooting some more with it this weekend.
Here are a few shots I snapped around the neighborhood.
My initial impressions with the new Sigma 19/2.8+NEX5N : pretty good lens esp for the price.Pictures are still in the camera but this is what I noticed:
Pros:
Sharp across the frame even wide opened
Good colour rendition
Good contrast even wide opened
Small
Cons:
Slow AF and start up time
Pronounced LCAs in contrasty light that don't disappear with stopping down
Rattles when shaken
weird 46mm filter thread
46mm is actually not that uncommon especially for RF glass.
So I've been playing around with mine. Just to make sure it's not just my eyes but does anyone else see diffraction glow in the F8 shot vs F5.6 shot here in the foliage?
It seems like on the NEX-7, its better most times to go with F5.6 and reserve F8 like I do F11 in most other cameras. Only in extreme circumstances.
FlyPenFly wrote:
46mm is actually not that uncommon especially for RF glass.
So I've been playing around with mine. Just to make sure it's not just my eyes but does anyone else see diffraction glow in the F8 shot vs F5.6 shot here in the foliage?
It seems like on the NEX-7, its better most times to go with F5.6 and reserve F8 like I do F11 in most other cameras. Only in extreme circumstances.
That's pretty much what I have found depending upon the lens. Best result is F4 or 5.6 with F8 reserved for ultimate dof and/or sharp corners with wides.
