sigma 30mm f1.4... anyone used?

[Ryan708]

Thinking of getting a fast prime, either sigma 30/1.4 or the canon 50 1.4.    I was wondering if anyone has used either/both? I think I would use the 30mm more often, i currently have a 28/2.8 and a 50 1.8. I use the 50mm more currently but thats mostly because it is faster.  thoughts appreciated thanks!

[Mt Spokane Photography]

There are those who love it and those who hate it, all you need to do is use that search box on the main page.
What many agree on is that AF accuracy out of the box is often poor or erratic and a trip to Sigma service often helps.
I'd avoid buying used for that reason, since that trip to Sigma will cost you dearly if out of warranty. 
 

[Fleetie]

Yes, I have had both. I started with the Sigma 30/1.4 on my 7D.

It was appallingly bad in the corners. Like 10 pixels of CA/smear.

I said to myself, "I've just paid £1200 (camera) + £400 (IIRC) for this lens, and the overall image quality is worse than a £300 P&S camera's.". There is more to it than that, of course, but no, the lens was quickly returned and I got the Canon 50/1.4.

While the Canon 50/1.4 does suffer from quite bad "halation" (light smear, loss of contrast, etc.) wide-open, once stopped down to f/2 or so, it is very sharp, but you still have the f/1.4 option when you need it.

My experience with the (admittedly one sample of) Sigma lens was so bad, that I doubt I'll buy another Sigma lens ever again.

[Ryan708]

Thanks for the input. I think im just gunna have to get my hands on both at the same time and see how it goes haha. Sigma seems to be real hit and miss on canon's. I have a 17-70 2.8/4 sigma that amazes people that use it, but have seen samples of other people's 17-70 that were very bad indeed.

[foobar]

I have it and while the corners are nothing to rave about (bad, but not as bad as Fleetie's copy), in the image center, it's one of the sharpest lenses I've ever encountered.

It does have it's share of problems (soft corners, CA, high distortion for a prime lens), but overall, I wouldn't call it a bad lens - not for that price. As I said, apart from the corners, it's very sharp (at least my copy), the bokeh is okay, the build quality is good for the price (feels solid, has a metal mount, a non-rotating front element and an ultrasonic motor) and let's not forget: it's the only f/1.4 lens in that focal- and price range.

[akiskev]

Yes, I have had both. I started with the Sigma 30/1.4 on my 7D.

It was appallingly bad in the corners. Like 10 pixels of CA/smear.

I said to myself, "I've just paid £1200 (camera) + £400 (IIRC) for this lens, and the overall image quality is worse than a £300 P&S camera's.". There is more to it than that, of course, but no, the lens was quickly returned and I got the Canon 50/1.4.

While the Canon 50/1.4 does suffer from quite bad "halation" (light smear, loss of contrast, etc.) wide-open, once stopped down to f/2 or so, it is very sharp, but you still have the f/1.4 option when you need it.

My experience with the (admittedly one sample of) Sigma lens was so bad, that I doubt I'll buy another Sigma lens ever again.

From my own experience, ca is very easy to fix in post(raw). Was this the only problem with the Sigma?

[pdirestajr]

Since you already have the 50mm f/1.8, why not look at the 35mm f/2?


I'd choose that over the Sigma 30mm.. It's cheaper, Canon, no focus issues, compatible with FF and has great IQ. Especially on a crop where the corners won't even be seen!

The 50 1.4 isn't much better than the 1.8, actually, I got rid of the 1.4 and replaced it with the 50mm 1.8 mkI.

[PixelReaper]

I had the Sigma 30 before I got my 35L 1.4.  I used it on a 60D and while the center was fairly sharp the autofocus was an issue for me.  In general the rendering was not great either, but it is a decent crop lens if you need the 1.4 and are on a tight budget.  Personally I would recommend looking for a used 35L or 24L.  I think you will prefer them by a mile and they will be more future proof if you decide to go FF.

my 2cents at least

[Petya7]

I have just shot with the Sigma 30mm. Here it is:

Corso (Sigma 30mm 1.4)	Small | Large

All shots at 1.4
My copy is sharp throughout the picture, focus ring sucks though. I have it for 2 years now, and once a year it went back to repair. It was so stiff. Not a problem if you're using AF.
Also love the build quality and AF speed.

[Kathode-Ray]

I own the 30mm 1.4 for almost six months now, and I love it. I bought it second hand and got the new 'smooth finish' version. It doesn't have any focus issues, it's built like a tank and it's my favorite prime at the moment.

The angle of view on cropped sensor is like 50mm FF and I think it's just perfect. I also had both the Sigma and the Canon 50mm 1.4's, but they are a bit too long for my taste and I had focussing problems with both lenses.

Here's a sample, 60D 30mm f/2.0 1/125s ISO400.

[spinworkxroy]

Personally, if you already have the 28 f2.8, there's really no need for the 30mm.
I had the 30mm before and loved it.
HOWEVER, once i upgraded to FF, i had to sell it and i had no similar range lens…so i had to buy the 50 1.4
i know people say you should buy what you need now…BUT you will never know when you will upgrade to FF and lenses are something you buy and keep for much longer than the body..so why not buy a compatible lens in the first place.
I initially only thoughti will never go FF so i bought the 30mm over the 28mm but under 1yr, i switched to FF and lost from reselling the 30mm and paying more for another 50mm..
It's a good lens yes (If you get a good copy), but i really wished Sigma made it FX compatible in the first place

[Promature]

First post here, been lurking for a while.  Anyway, if you have a 28mm f2.8 and you just need a faster prime, I'd suggest you just get the Canon EF 28mm f1.8.  It gives you USM, similar speed, better focusing, good pictures, option to use on FF, and similar price to Sigma 30mm. 

If you don't want another Canon lens, look for the Bower/Samyung/Rokinon 35mm f1.4 lens.  It's a pretty awesome lens, but no AF.

[boateggs]

I have the Sigma and love it.  My first copy front focused real bad, my second copy is almost perfect (barely front focused and only noticed when I decided to test it).  I had the 50/1.8 first and thought it was fun but too long.  30ish mm is just damn comfortable to me on a crop.  I choose the Sigma over the Canon for 3 reasons:  apature, full time manual focus (broke my kit les because of this), and it is said to be sharper than the Canon*.  Concerning the Canon 50/1.4, I was planning on getting this but without full time manual focus I was holding back.  After getting my Sigma 30, I am planning on replacing the 50/1.8 with the Sigma 50/1.4 (my next body will have AFMA so I do not have to deal with small focus issues).


*After I got my Sigma, I found out that it is sharper than the Canon but only in the middle.  The Canon 35/2 is better on the edges.  From what I have seen/heard they are even across the frame, just choose which is better for your style.

[onkel_wart]

I started loving this lens once I understood that you need to shoot wide open with it. On my 50D it shifts too much at smaller apertures. So I wouldn't call this an all purpose lens, but I'm glad I have it.
1.4 works wonders...
But do test your copy before you buy it.
(oh, and yes, I would like a 35L, but I just don't have the money)

[katwil]

I bought one a couple years ago because I wanted to mimic the FF look of a 50 mm lens on my crop camera.  I had heard many stories of back-focus on the lens, so I did a lot of testing on my copy to ensure that wasn’t an issue, which it wasn’t.  I found the lens to perform well in very low light.  If you get a good copy the Sigma 30 mm is a nice value for the money.  That said, I would suggest that you buy it somewhere with an easy return policy if you encounter any focus issues.