So I'm going to replace my D200 with a D5100, and have been trying to order the Nikon 35 to go with it (50 mm just doesn't cut it on crop sensors). It appears sold out everywhere. Anyone know what's up? I would have thought this lens wouldn't be made in Japan - is it discontinued, or just surprisingly popular?
Nikon 35mm 1.8 vs Sigma 30mm 1.4
(51 posts) (21 voices)-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
answer is here
http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3443Posted 2 years ago # -
Thanks for the quick post!
Should have searched around more, i guess...
Posted 2 years ago # -
-
TaoTeJared said:
Couldn't see the vid - plugin link is in German and is more technical than my brain can translate.If anyone has the link for the plugin that would be great! I have found some, but they are just zipped files with no instructions or ability to install into a browser. :(
What browser are you using? I didn't know you had to have some special plugin, I just copied the URL into the reply box. Do you have the latest version of flash player?
Posted 2 years ago # -
Sorry I should have posted I got it to work. After I went to other sites the same thing was happening with Chrome. Time to reboot anyway. seemed to work but I didn't see if any updates were waiting to apply. - Thanks for the follow up though!
Posted 2 years ago # -
I found the exact same thing. It over exposes 1-2 stops constantly and miss-focuses/ doesn't lock quite a bit. Bokeh is ok but not that much better than the Nikon.
padlockd said:
Here's a DRTV vid if anyone is still interested. He says the bokeh of the Nikkor is bad, but I think it's just fine. Bokeh is very subjective after all.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Hi,
Here is the 35mm Nikon at f2
I had the syntax messed up earlier.
A tip of the hat to Adamz and a curse to old stubborn eyes.
But on subject, I don't think there is much difference between f1.8/f2.0 there's just a smidgen of difference.
Certainly worth looking at, but I would likely lean to the Nikon.
My best,
Mike
Posted 2 years ago # -
I would agree completely with Kai Wu's comments-- the Bokeh's not THAT great (which can be said about the 50/1.8 and many other good lenses), the handling feel's very plasticky but it's ridiculously light, fast as hell on D7000, and sharp, great colors. For $200 it is a steal.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Sigma 30mm with exact same settings applied on all three photos in Lightroom:
f/1.4
f/2.0
f/2.8
(there was a light breeze resulting in the limbs on the tree moving slightly between pictures)
Posted 2 years ago # -
Just thought I would add this here if anyone is looking for this lens. Seems like a pretty good price for the Sigma 30 F1.4 compared to other places that have it for sale.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Seems to my untrained eye that there is a significant improvement in sharpness as you move away from wide open in those pics?
Posted 1 year ago # -
spraynpray said:
Seems to my untrained eye that there is a significant improvement in sharpness as you move away from wide open in those pics?I think it might just be the narrow focus plane at 1.4. It would probably be a better comparison with a single subject and a solid color background. Hard to concentrate on what is sharper and not because it brings the other flowers into focus.
Posted 1 year ago # -
tcole1983 said:
I think it might just be the narrow focus plane at 1.4. It would probably be a better comparison with a single subject and a solid color background. Hard to concentrate on what is sharper and not because it brings the other flowers into focus.Just look at the yellow pollen area.
Posted 1 year ago # -
spraynpray said:
Just look at the yellow pollen area.Yeah I noticed that. Hard to say at that resolution. I do see a drastic difference at the F2.8, but I am wondering if it is a focus issue or something else. Like I said I think a more controlled picture with better subject would be a better comparison.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Could be front focusing I guess, either way it isn't as good as the 35mm f1.8G pics I've seen.
How about some more pics Velocity Stop?
Posted 1 year ago # -
tcole1983 said:
I think it might just be the narrow focus plane at 1.4. It would probably be a better comparison with a single subject and a solid color background. Hard to concentrate on what is sharper and not because it brings the other flowers into focus.I agree - focus plane is only 2" max at that distance (3ft). The Nikon at 1.8 is 1.8". Missing due to breeze, a little shake, etc. is what one will see more.
I own both, selling the Sigma only due to the Nikon being smaller. They both are very sharp. They are truly 5mm apart - that does make a difference, albeit small, but it does make enough that pixel peepers incorrectly see as negatives between the two rather than the difference of focal length.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I actually sold my Sigma 30mm and currently own the Nikon 35mm 1.8. I bought the Sigma in used condition for really cheap. I used it for a while and loved it. Then I needed some money, so I sold it and actually made some money on it. I missed the Sigma, and when I stumbled upon a brand new Nikon at a really good price, I had to give it a try.
There are advantages and disadvantages to both lenses. My artsy side loved the Sigma, but my practical side prefers a lot of the performance aspects of the Nikon. The Nikon may be the more consistent performer, but the Sigma can arguably take a prettier picture. I would describe them as having different personalities.
If you want to just pick up a lens and take pictures, get the Nikon. Nikon's focus is much more responsive than the Sigma's and it more likely to just do what you tell it to do when you tell it to do it. The Nikon is a cheap, plastic lens. This means that it is much lighter and smaller than the Sigma, but also that it feels like a cheap plastic lens. The pictures from the Nikon have a sharp, clean look to them. Like most Nikon lenses it does lean toward the cool side of the color spectrum while the Sigma leans more toward the warm side (no noticeable color casting from either, but you can tell there is a slight difference in the colors which result in slightly better skin tones with the Sigma). I can't really say anything bad about the Nikon, but the Sigma can do things that the Nikon can't.
If you are more picky about the look and feel of the picture, The Sigma without a doubt has creamier/dreamier looking bokeh and can go to f/1.4 to create even more of it. It is also slightly wider at 30mm. The Sigma has a solid, heavy, professional feel to it, but it doesn't always act professional when it comes to focusing.
About the focusing: My copy didn't back focus or front focus as far as I could tell... sometimes it just didn't want to re-focus if the subject was close to being in focus or had moved slightly (mostly would happen in low light). In my experience, the Sigma can focus and can take a sharp picture... sometimes it just doesn't want to do it especially if it doesn't like the lighting. It is almost as if it is lazy and thinks if it is close enough, that is good enough. For example, I could see that it was slightly out of focus and would have to press the shutter down half way more than one time before it would re-focus. In some cases, I had to either grab the focus ring and pull it further out of focus or point the camera at something else, focus, and then point it back to where I actually want it to focus.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Hi All,
I am a proud owner of Nikon D80 and have recently bought Nikon fixed 50mm F1.4. I love it- Absolutely amazing Boooooooookeh (as Kai, presenter above, would say).
However, 50mm is not ideal for indoors. I have found myself walking back into furniture and knocking over glass items. The extra zoom is not user friendly for crammed environments.
Thus, my priority I feel would be to get the optimal 30mm/35mm lense for an indoor environment (low light levels) as well as a fast auto-focus. Sharpness and bookeh would not be so important as my 50mm covers those apsects beautifully. Is this logic sound? My priority (listed in order)for 30/35mm lense would be
1:suitable for indoors and low light,
2:fast autofocus,
3:small weight
4:bookeh,
5:sharpnessWith this in mind, do I go for 30mm Sigma F1.4 or 35mm Nikon F1.8?
Would Sigma be more advantageous with an F1.4 in low light levels? The general consensus seems to support nikon but at F1.8, I would be slightly concerned that I would not be letting in enough light. Could users of this lense advise me on low light conditions (or better upload some pics). On the other hand it seems that the sigma underperforms in autofocus and weight. Is this a good lense for low light conditions (examples here would also be appreciated)?
Or maybe I should not get either of these lenses? a flash perhaps? pls advise. Thanks, Paul.
Posted 1 year ago # -
^^^ Well I haven't tried the Sigma, but everything you listed sounds like the Nikon 35 F1.8. It is inexpensive as well which is also a bonus. I don't think you are going to gain much with the 1.4 over the 1.8...if you are at that point then you will probably need either a tripod, higher ISO or flash anyway.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I have both and I use the Nikon 100% of the time. The difference between 1.4 vs. 1.8 is basically zero as the slight difference of the focal length 30mm vs 35mm. It ends up being basically the same for bokeh. The light intake is not enough for you too have any real difference. When I had my D80 the sigma always went "green" i.e. turning the color temp greener than I ever wanted. It does it much less on my D300.
If you are that concerned about light gathering I would get the Nikon and use your on-camera flash with a small modifier.
Posted 1 year ago # -
What modifier? :D
TaoTeJared said:
I have both and I use the Nikon 100% of the time. The difference between 1.4 vs. 1.8 is basically zero as the slight difference of the focal length 30mm vs 35mm. It ends up being basically the same for bokeh. The light intake is not enough for you too have any real difference. When I had my D80 the sigma always went "green" i.e. turning the color temp greener than I ever wanted. It does it much less on my D300.If you are that concerned about light gathering I would get the Nikon and use your on-camera flash with a small modifier.
Posted 1 year ago # -
That is a whole other thread ;)
I just use a white cloth (old t-shirt, napkin, etc) with a rubber band to diffuse the flash or just a note card to send it up to bounce off the ceiling. It works just as good as anything else.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Hey many thanks for the tips. Definitely changed my opinion. Tao- are you sure you are not a Nikon salesman?
FYI Gabb this is what I have: http://www.ebay.com/itm/3-color-Pop-Up-Flash-Diffuser-Cover-for-Canon-Nikon-SDR-DSDR-camera-/150779054622?pt=Camera_Flash_Accessories&hash=item231b21ca1e#ht_2702wt_1139
Have the white one. Colours are warmer and makes people more attractive. Should work nicely with the 35mm.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Thanks. I might buy this set as well. I don't like to lug around my big speed-light ..
paulsoskin said:
Hey many thanks for the tips. Definitely changed my opinion. Tao- are you sure you are not a Nikon salesman?FYI Gabb this is what I have: http://www.ebay.com/itm/3-color-Pop-Up-Flash-Diffuser-Cover-for-Canon-Nikon-SDR-DSDR-camera-/150779054622?pt=Camera_Flash_Accessories&hash=item231b21ca1e#ht_2702wt_1139
Have the white one. Colours are warmer and makes people more attractive. Should work nicely with the 35mm.
Posted 1 year ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
