p.1 #1 · Canon 28mm f/1.8 vs Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (A) on Full Frame
I was just looking at lenses today and then I though about it. I have my 28mm f/1.8 and it works great and everything, BUT it's working at a -17MFA on the 5DIII. I can't mount it on my 40D and expect good pictures, since it's off by so much.
Then I saw the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (A). It's only 2mm difference, 2/3 stop more light, and USB dock adjustments. The Sigma, althuogh advertised as a EF-S lens, mounts to a FF camera just fine with no problems!
The 28mm costs $450 while the 30mm costs $500. They're in the same price range too.
Thuoghts, input? Possibly anyone with the Sigma want to chime in?
p.1 #2 · Canon 28mm f/1.8 vs Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (A) on Full Frame
One way to think about this is to ask yourself how good the Sigma is wide open—as in, is it even good enough to be considered functional. Maybe when you apply a reasonable standard for image quality you will start to think of the Sigma as an f/2.8 lens. If so, look at the Canon 28mm f/2.8 IS, and compare them both at that aperture. And of course you can expect the new Canon to function at peak efficiency on the 5D III, and you get IS. You might decide it's worth the extra bucks.
p.1 #3 · Canon 28mm f/1.8 vs Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (A) on Full Frame
splathrop wrote:
One way to think about this is to ask yourself how good the Sigma is wide open—as in, is it even good enough to be considered functional. Maybe when you apply a reasonable standard for image quality you will start to think of the Sigma as an f/2.8 lens. If so, look at the Canon 28mm f/2.8 IS, and compare them both at that aperture. And of course you can expect the new Canon to function at peak efficiency on the 5D III, and you get IS. You might decide it's worth the extra bucks.
I've never used the old Sigma 30mm but the new one is pretty good. I uploaded a sample picture I got when using it in the store. It's leagues ahead of the 28mm f/1.8 in wide aperture. Though as usual, the Sigma is riddled with CA, but that can always be removed in post.
The 28mm f/2.8 IS is nice and all but if it's f/2.8, I might as well just use my 24-70mm f/2.8.
p.1 #7 · Canon 28mm f/1.8 vs Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (A) on Full Frame
splathrop: you can expect the new Canon to function at peak efficiency on the 5D III, and you get IS
If you use a Canon lens of f2.8 or more open, you can use the 5 central double cross sensors of the 5D3, getting extremely accurate focus.
volks1470: The 28mm f/2.8 IS is nice and all but if it's f/2.8, I might as well just use my 24-70mm f/2.8
Using the 1/focal length rule, the 24-70 at 28mm should use 1/30 or faster shutter speed. Since the 28 IS has a newer 4 stop IS, it should get equal sharpness at 1/2 second. Would you like to demonstrate how steady you can hold the 24-70 at 1/2 second?
p.1 #9 · Canon 28mm f/1.8 vs Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (A) on Full Frame
I owned the original Sigma 30mm 1.4 and that vignetted hard on my 5D, so the 28 1.8 was a no brainer when I was shooting both APS-C and FF. Personally, and as reviewed, the original 30mm 1.4 was typically had similar performance (a tad worse, but at 1.4 vs 1.8, so....) to the 28 1.8.
Also, the used prices of the 28 1.8 are quite low, ~$350, where as there are none of the SA30 1.4.
Finally, have you tried the 28 1.8 on the 40D? I've always found overall that Canon lenses focused better on Canon bodies than Sigma lenses. I'm quite surprised about such a high MA adjustment. But until you shoot it on the 40D, you can't say it wont work well on it.
p.1 #11 · Canon 28mm f/1.8 vs Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (A) on Full Frame
boingyman wrote:
Yeah I'm interested to know if the new Sig 30 causes any vignetting on FF without cropping? I didn't even know it could be mounted on FF...
Well all 3rd party crop lenses are EF rather than canon's crop EFs lenses , so they will mount on a FF body .
But if the Art 30 covers all of the FF image circle then that's quite something and offers another fast option .
I've had the old 30 and seem to remember it being quite good on my mk2n but I've never tried on a FF
p.1 #12 · Canon 28mm f/1.8 vs Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (A) on Full Frame
Ian.Dobinson wrote:
Well all 3rd party crop lenses are EF rather than canon's crop EFs lenses , so they will mount on a FF body .
But if the Art 30 covers all of the FF image circle then that's quite something and offers another fast option .
I've had the old 30 and seem to remember it being quite good on my mk2n but I've never tried on a FF
A large intention was to show people that the new 30mm not only mounts to a full frame, it covers it 100% too! Opening up more options for lens choices. It seems most all third party lenses will mount to full frame. Whether or not they vignette hardcore, that just needs to be tested!
The first picture is uncropped and unedited from the 30mm.
The second picture is uncropped and unedited from the 17-70mm.
p.1 #16 · Canon 28mm f/1.8 vs Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (A) on Full Frame
Dudewithoutape wrote:
Interesting, someone needs to do a 30A vs 35A shootout then Is the 5mm worth $400 more?!?!?!? *que dramatic music*
That actually would be a great comparison!
Here's an example of badly my 28mm f/1.8 focuses. This is easily repeatable, time after time. It's always wrong.
Focused from infinity
Live view 10x manual focus
Jun 14, 2013 at 07:15 PM
Guest
Guest
p.1 #17 · Canon 28mm f/1.8 vs Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (A) on Full Frame
"The Crop Hack" strikes back! Quite a revelation there with the 30/1.4 A. I remember trying the old 30/1.4 on APS-H camera body and it was getting worse with stopping down (passable until about f/5).
p.1 #18 · Canon 28mm f/1.8 vs Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (A) on Full Frame
I'm still perplexed why the 30 f/1.4 doesn't vignette on FF. Does it really have a 29mm image circle? This is a nice little lens and much cheaper and smaller than the 35 f/1.4, although not as sharp, it's still very good.
p.1 #19 · Canon 28mm f/1.8 vs Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (A) on Full Frame
Pixel Perfect wrote:
I'm still perplexed why the 30 f/1.4 doesn't vignette on FF. Does it really have a 29mm image circle? This is a nice little lens and much cheaper and smaller than the 35 f/1.4, although not as sharp, it's still very good.
It is strange. Perhaps Sigma doesn't want it to eat into it's higher end 35mm by labeling it as an "EF-S" lens.
