h00ligan wrote:
Maybe they are waiting for the next ff body to test af in case canon changes something...
Just a thought. It would suck to get an all sigma lineup and then have the body make them obsolete.
Not a big deal; there can be a firmware update to fix it. And after all, my current camera is probably going to outlive me.
Gunzorro wrote:
stebesplace -- I would really appreciate your examples showing the quality of the 28/1.8, especially on the 1DII. I'm waiting on a 1DII myself, and thought the slight crop might improve on the edge quality of the 28. I've heard/read mixed reviews on the 28, but it seems like a great lens if it can hold together on FF or the 1.3X crop.
FF images would be appreciated if others have them.
My 28 1.8 seems to handle PP much better on my 1D2. With that being said, here are shots directly out of camera (from RAW) with no PP.
Thanks. I was testing a Sigma 30/1.4 in a shop today, and the vignetting only really looks objectionable at f/8 and smaller; f/5.6 is marginal. I'll blow up the images later to see the resolution (only did testing on a sheet of print).
I tested the 85/1.4 as well; seems a stellar lens! Did have the occasional misfocused shot but it was because I tried multi AF point shooting; seemed dead on when focusing on a specific shot. Can't say much about sharpness since I only saw the shots on my camera screen, but even so they seemed good.
The bokeh on the 35 f/2 is definitely busier, but it is a gem of a lens notwithstanding. Sharp as heck even wide open; equally good as a long-normal lens on a crop body.
I tried a Sigma 30/1.4 on my N in a shop. The center is very sharp at f/2 (can't seem to find a f/1.4 picture). Found that vignetting is acceptable until about f/4, gets pronounced at f/5.6 and really ugly at f/8. Not sure how subject distance influences this. The test wasn't scientific but I'd probably refrain from getting this lens for the N, at least until I can test it out in the wild as opposed to the dimly lit shop where I can't rack through various focus distances and take more pictures. And compare it to the 28 and 24.
Anyone interested in them pictures?
Snopchenko wrote:
I tried a Sigma 30/1.4 on my N in a shop. The center is very sharp at f/2 (can't seem to find a f/1.4 picture). Found that vignetting is acceptable until about f/4, gets pronounced at f/5.6 and really ugly at f/8. Not sure how subject distance influences this. The test wasn't scientific but I'd probably refrain from getting this lens for the N, at least until I can test it out in the wild as opposed to the dimly lit shop where I can't rack through various focus distances and take more pictures. And compare it to the 28 and 24.
Anyone interested in them pictures?...Show more →
In my sample, the Sigma 30 is quite good in the center even wide open on an APS-C body, better than both the Canon 28 1.8 and 50 1.4 when used wide open on FF.
The edges are soft, however, pretty much throughout the aperture range, so it's not a lens for architecture or landscapes.
There is vignetting even on APS-C, so I wouldn't think it would work so well on APS-H.
And we're returning to where we came from: that 30mm on APS-H is a weird FOV, not wide angle by any means. I found the 24mm FOV much more versatile (on my 24-85).
I remember asking about the original 24/1.4 L. From The-Digital-Picture.com review it seems that the original L has performance similar to 28/1.8 USM but with 2/3 stop advantage whereas the second iteration is much sharper. Anyone can confirm/deny this?
TDP crops suggest that all have similar sharpness wide open. The 24/1.4 II has a slight advantage but IMHO the price and weight difference are substantially bigger.
Yeah, it's kinda out of question unless I swap my 16-35 for it. However, I'm not ready to give it up just yet (funny that in this case I'd be all but switching to primes... I'm also contemplating a 85).
Snopchenko wrote:
And we're returning to where we came from: that 30mm on APS-H is a weird FOV, not wide angle by any means. I found the 24mm FOV much more versatile (on my 24-85).
I own all of the 'L' primes, and the Sigma for crop, but my current working prime lens kit for APS-H is this:
EF 20 2.8
EF 28 1.8
EF 50 1.4
EF 85 1.8
EF 135 2.0
I just find these FL's conform to my shooting style best, and I prefer the size, weight, and handling of these lenses over the 'L's. IQ on both the 20 and 28 are fine if stopped down 1/3 stop from wide open, CA is no longer an issue with modern software, and I find all of these primes sharper at 2.8 than most of the 2.8 zooms.
On APS-H, the 28 is quite close to 35mm FOV, my favorite wide angle FL for people. 24mm could be a good choice too, but is a bit too loose for my style (last time I shot with the 24 on the Mark III I found myself cropping).
Here's a shot from last night with the 28, ISO 1600 at f/2.8 on the 1D Mark III:
I owned the 28/1.8 a while back and regretfully sold it. I'm actually in the market for another one myself. You can't go wrong with it. It's small, light and fast with USM focusing. In my opinion it's on-par with the 50/1.4 and 85/1.8. I had the 28/1.8 and 35/2.0 at the same time and the AF on the 28 was quieter and a tad faster thanks to the USM. I didn't mind the buzzy AF of the 35, but I just wasn't impressed with it.
The 28 made some great images. I don't have any to show presently but I'll try and dig some up if I can. I'm currently using the 35L and it's a rock star, but the 28 can really hold its own.
I bought a 28/1.8 as a poor-man's alternative to the 24L and 35L (both of which I tried since my friend has them). Although the L lenses are faster and feels better built, I do love my 28/1.8 as much as I love my 50/1.4.
