Just got a Sigma 30mm f1.4 - Jury's out

Got a fairly good deal on one without case or hood or anything though. Just tried it on my Canon 450D and I'm not particularly bowled over by it, but it's pretty OK. I was hoping for something sharper, but maybe I need a 24L mkII instead? I'm just starting out so don't want to get too ahead of myself though!

I've compared images taken with my cheapo nifty fifty mk2 and find that @ f/1.8 the 50mm is slightly sharper than the 30mm, even though the sigma is stopped down. I do love the 50mm but it's just not wide enough for intimate portraits and party shots and I was just looking for something of the same quality, but wider, like 24mm. Do I really have to spend £1000?!?!

Quick question: does anyone have a hood for this I could buy? Alternatively there are plenty of generic hoods on eBay for a fiver or so. What are the pros and cons of a proper fitted sigma hood compared to the ones which would screw on to the filter thread of the lens instead? Are these more awkward to use?

efunc wrote in post #9995023
Got a fairly good deal on one without case or hood or anything though. Just tried it on my Canon 450D and I'm not particularly bowled over by it, but it's pretty OK. I was hoping for something sharper, but maybe I need a 24L mkII instead? I'm just starting out so don't want to get too ahead of myself though!

I've compared images taken with my cheapo nifty fifty mk2 and find that @ f/1.8 the 50mm is slightly sharper than the 30mm, even though the sigma is stopped down. I do love the 50mm but it's just not wide enough for intimate portraits and party shots and I was just looking for something of the same quality, but wider, like 24mm. Do I really have to spend £1000?!?!

Quick question: does anyone have a hood for this I could buy? Alternatively there are plenty of generic hoods on eBay for a fiver or so. What are the pros and cons of a proper fitted sigma hood compared to the ones which would screw on to the filter thread of the lens instead? Are these more awkward to use?

If you are gonna compare every lens you get to the nifty fifty, I am sure you will be sorely disappointed by most zooms and even some primes.

The nifty fiftys not usually that great wide open though, I would have expected more from the sigma 30 after hearing such good things about it.

Supra_t wrote in post #9995118
The nifty fiftys not usually that great wide open though, I would have expected more from the sigma 30 after hearing such good things about it.

Did you hear this from the internet? The internet spouts all sorts of nonsense.

Here is a test I did... it is pretty much just as sharp wide open as stopped down

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=833734

Supra_t wrote in post #9995118
The nifty fiftys not usually that great wide open though, I would have expected more from the sigma 30 after hearing such good things about it.

yes, me too. maybe I just got a poor copy? I just took a couple more - both lenses wide open this time. The canon just seems to have the edge on sharpness than the sigma, but are otherwise fairly similar. maybe i should just buy another couple of 30mm's and keep the one which is the sharpest.

Really? Mine is pretty damn sharp. Granted I sold my nifty fifty for the Sigma 30mm so I cant compare them directly, but I'm quite happy with the sharpness of my Sigma.

themadman wrote in post #9995148
Did you hear this from the internet? The internet spouts all sorts of nonsense.

Here is a test I did... it is pretty much just as sharp wide open as stopped down

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=833734

great tests there. just confirms why i am so fond of the 50mm. For most purposes however it is useless to me ans I just need something wider, but the same characteristics. My tests were not as comprehensive as yours though. i'll try some more tomorrow.

My Sigma 30 was one the sharpest lenses I ever owned. Even wide open.

XxDJCyberLoverxX wrote in post #9995178
Really? Mine is pretty damn sharp. Granted I sold my nifty fifty for the Sigma 30mm so I cant compare them directly, but I'm quite happy with the sharpness of my Sigma.

that's good to know. i'll test another copy and see it it's just my one that's bad. (I wouldn't describe it as 'bad' exactly.. just not quite as sharp as the canon.)

efunc wrote in post #9995159
yes, me too. maybe I just got a poor copy? I just took a couple more - both lenses wide open this time. The canon just seems to have the edge on sharpness than the sigma, but are otherwise fairly similar. maybe i should just buy another couple of 30mm's and keep the one which is the sharpest.

If you bought it at a store, just go try them in the shop with your camera and a computer.

Keep in mind sharpness is not the only property of a lens that is important. The 50L wide open is about as sharp (maybe even less) than the nifty fifty wide open (yes, I am comparing f1.2 to 1.8). And once you get to f2.8 the nifty fifty may also exceed the 50L. Does that make the 50L a worse lens than the nifty fifty? No.

I bought this used, in a dark alley in South London. (I'm not kiddin!) Although the seller did say I could return it if not happy. I think I'll hold onto it until I test another copy for comparison.

I agree, I think that sharpness can be a bit of a fixation, and maybe a distraction when looking at the overall picture. I still have a lot of experimentation to do and techniques to learn.

My Sigma 30mm is very sharp...I remember being blown away the first time I opened up a shoot in Photoshop.

The problem is that it doesn't always focus accurately....so much so, that I'm afraid to use it wide open...and only use it below F4 when playing around.

Have you ruled out any focusing problems? It is a lot more common to hear that this lens didn't focus properly than sharpness issues. If that were the case you can send it to Sigma to get calibrated.

juanpafer wrote in post #9995303
Have you ruled out any focusing problems? It is a lot more common to hear that this lens didn't focus properly than sharpness issues. If that were the case you can send it to Sigma to get calibrated.

Not necessarily. What's the best way to test for this? I've taken images where the foreground is out of focus and the background is out of focus and the centre is in focus. The centre doesn't look particularly sharp even though it's in focus. Presumably, if I had focusing issues these images would reveal a sharp area at the transition between the out of focus foreground and background areas I guess, irrespective of where the lens thinks it's focusing?

efunc wrote in post #9995439
Not necessarily. What's the best way to test for this? I've taken images where the foreground is out of focus and the background is out of focus and the centre is in focus. The centre doesn't look particularly sharp even though it's in focus. Presumably, if I had focusing issues these images would reveal a sharp area at the transition between the out of focus foreground and background areas I guess, irrespective of where the lens thinks it's focusing?

If you want to test without replying on autofocus, just throw your camera into live view and manual focus.