SD14+1 lens...suggestions?

Well it seems like the time is arriving. And after pestering this board for the past couple of months or so, I will soon be making a decision as to whether or not to take the SD14 plunge.

On a personal note, I would like to thank the board..and yes Danke Shane to the many European members who have been so helpful. Really, Everyone has have been very helpful to all my questions, and I have had many of them! And I would also like to apologize if I have been a bit too forward and silly from time to time, especially for a newcomer here.

So now I ask yet another question for assistance in picking out a lens.

I am thinking it wise to simply start out with one lens. I bought the Nikon D70S, my first DSLR, with the Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G . Actually that lens has served me well, but quite frankly I am enjoying using prime lenses a bit more, as I do enjoy utilizing available light indoors most of the time. I will be shooting indoors around the house much, landscape, flowers(not necessarily Macro), I enjoy panning horses, and might decide one day to get off my fat as* and organize some kind of amature studio.

I had been thinking about one of the following for starters:

Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC Macro
Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC MACRO
Sigma 70mm f/2.8 EX DG
Sigma 50-150mm F2.8 EX DC APO HSM

I guess my primary objective would be to get comfortable witht the camera, and try to see the great quality it offers.

I have been thinking very much about all the above lenses. And, because of the reviews of how sharp the Sigma 70mm f/2.8 EX DG is, I am seriously giving this lens the nod.

Thanks again for all the help

Mike

I do not see this lens on your list. Is it not supposed to be sharp on a Foveon camera? Because otherwise it seems ideal for indoors available light photography being fast in terms of maximum aperture, and given the 1.7x focal length multiplier of Sigma cameras, it has almost exactly the same FOV as a classic 50mm lens on a 35mm film camera.

carauction said:

available light indoors most of the time. I will be shooting
indoors around the house much, landscape, flowers(not necessarily
Macro), I enjoy panning horses, and might decide one day to get
off my fat as* and organize some kind of amature studio.

I had been thinking about one of the following for starters:

Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC Macro
Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC MACRO
Sigma 70mm f/2.8 EX DG
Sigma 50-150mm F2.8 EX DC APO HSM

Click to expand...

--
http://www.troyammons.com
http://www.pbase.com/tammons

Zoltan2 said:

I do not see this lens on your list. Is it not supposed to be sharp
on a Foveon camera? Because otherwise it seems ideal for indoors
available light photography being fast in terms of maximum
aperture, and given the 1.7x focal length multiplier of Sigma
cameras, it has almost exactly the same FOV as a classic 50mm lens
on a 35mm film camera.

Click to expand...

Thank you for the response.

I have seen many mixed reviews on the 30 1.4. However, the focal length seems great for my indoor low light shooting.

I was also considering very highly the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC MACRO. I would be happy enough with the 2.8 and zoom range considering the 1.7 crop. However this review is less then stellar:

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_1850_28m_nikon/index.htm

Mike

Cannot really suggest something regarding the other lenses beause I have not used them so far but I have the old 18-50EX and it is very good. The new one seems to be even better.

I'd maybe eliminate the 50-150 as a first and only lens because it is not wide enough, the 70 also, for that and because of its limited flexibility.

So maybe try to get an 18-50 or 17-70, and the body-only version of the SD14 since the kit lens will be catching dust anyways as soon as you have an EX.

If you have no problems with getting a used one from ebay you might get a good deal leaving you with a basis to save up for a prime or that 50-150 (the latter would be my next choice if I was into longer lenses).

Personally I think my next lens will be the 10-20 but thats far into the future..

O.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ollivr/

I have the 70mmEX and it is very sharp indeed. Another sharp prime to consider is the 50mmEX.
Pete

Mike

carauction said:

I am thinking it wise to simply start out with one lens. I bought
the Nikon D70S, my first DSLR, with the Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G
. Actually that lens has served me well, but quite frankly I am
enjoying using prime lenses a bit more, as I do enjoy utilizing
available light indoors most of the time. I will be shooting
indoors around the house much, landscape, flowers(not necessarily
Macro), I enjoy panning horses, and might decide one day to get
off my fat as* and organize some kind of amature studio.

Click to expand...

Tricky...

The 30mm is good indoors - the wide angle and F1.4 helps.

You can shoot flowers with it too:
http://www.aceshardware.com/chris/flowers/

However, I must admit that the CA drives me up the wall for certain types of shots - eg landscapes.

The 18-50 would be better for landscapes and is good all-round.

--
New-ish SLR user and Sigma owner in London.
See my profile for my equipment list

Thanks Chris.

I am a bit undecided about the 30 1.4. Just cannot put my finger on it.

The 18-50 is sounding better.

Mike

carauction said:

Thanks Chris.

I am a bit undecided about the 30 1.4. Just cannot put my finger
on it.

Click to expand...

It might have been my favourite lens if not for the CA.

carauction said:

The 18-50 is sounding better.

Click to expand...

Maybe try asking potential dealers if they'll give you a discount if you buy two nice lenses with the body - Expansys are doing this in Europe but they don't seem to carry the SD14 in the US.

That way, maybe you can afford a general purpose zoom + super-sharp prime

--
New-ish SLR user and Sigma owner in London.
See my profile for my equipment list

carauction said:

Thanks Chris.

I am a bit undecided about the 30 1.4. Just cannot put my finger
on it.

The 18-50 is sounding better.

Mike

Click to expand...

Hi Mike,

There are a few people who make just brilliant photos with the 30mm, the one person whose work really made the choice for me was Carl Rytterfalk. Check out his website at
http://www.rytterfalk.com
Cheers!
Chebb
http://www.pbase.com/thechebb

carauction said:

However this review is less then stellar:

Click to expand...

Don't be scared by this review. If you are a Nikon user, the Tamron or Nikon equivalents may be somewhat better, mainly at 17-18 mm f/2.8 in the corners. Of course, since the SD14 sensor is smaller than the Nikon's, the extreme corners may not matter.

Laurence's "man walking down the street" SD14 sample shot was taken with this lens IIRC.

--
Erik

Thanks Erik

I was told that the higher center sharpness number of a lens means that it is indeed sharper at the center. This lens has a very high center sharpness number of almost 2300 at f4. Actually higheer than the Sigma 30 1.4. Any thoughts about this?

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_1850_28m_nikon/index.htm

Mike

carauction said:

This lens has a very high
center sharpness number of almost 2300 at f4. Actually higheer
than the Sigma 30 1.4. Any thoughts about this?

Click to expand...

The 30 f/1.4 was tested on a 350D, the 18-50EX on a D200. There is a Canon test of the 18-50EX where it does a little worse than the 30EX.

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_1850_28/index.htm

I'm not sure that I'd trust photozone's (or anyone's) numbers to be that precise, accurate, and consistent that you could say that one of these lenses was sharper than the other. Then there is the possibility of sample varation. These types of lens tests can tell you which lenses are excellent, good, acceptable or awful. But they are probably not that useful to reliably predict one excellent lens vs. another.

If you want flexibility, go with the 18-50. It's perhaps the best one-lens choice you listed. If you want available light, go with the 30EX. Don't over analyze.

--
Erik

I have to admit that I have never been happy with my 30mm 1.4. Maybe I got a bad one. I love my 50mm EX prime and my 24-70mm F2.8 EX. If I had it to do over again, I would have gotten the 18-50mm EX instead of the 30mm. I will either get the 18-50mm next or the 10-20mm EX.

carauction said:

I have seen many mixed reviews on the 30 1.4. However, the focal
length seems great for my indoor low light shooting.

Click to expand...

Are related to misfocussing lenses. For some people (and never with mine) this is an issue of miscalibration to the body, and in other cases the difficulty of achieving focus with a f1.4 lens in low light. Unless you own a lot of fast primes, it is hard for users to put the Sigma results in context. The other caveats are "cone" shaped bokeh near the corners when shooting open with small point light sources in the background, and uneven sharpness across the frame (though the lens is a good deal more consistent than my 17-40L as far as that is concerned).

Sigma lens on Sigma body should render the focus issue moot. The color, contrast, sharpness, and resistence to flare on the 30/1.4 are second to none. In general the bokeh (excluding the cone potential) is first class. This is one of the best lenses for a crop digital sensor, and would be the first lens I would get if I went with a Sigma body.

--
-CW

Chris Rijk said:

carauction said:

Thanks Chris.

I am a bit undecided about the 30 1.4. Just cannot put my finger
on it.

Click to expand...

It might have been my favourite lens if not for the CA.

Click to expand...

I shoot RAW, and while the CA on the 30 (meaning the Red/Blue fringes on contrasty objects near the frame edges) are severe, they are easily dialed out in Adobe Camera RAW with about -25 on the slider. If I shot JPEG, the CA would indeed be a pain when shooting CA obvious situations like landscapes.

--
-CW

Erik Magnuson said:

I'm not sure that I'd trust photozone's (or anyone's) numbers to be
that precise, accurate, and consistent that you could say that one
of these lenses was sharper than the other.

Click to expand...

And besides, the numbers are just that - numbers, describing one somewhat quantifiable variable of an item having a number of variables effecting its performace.

The MTF numbers will not tell you anything about CA, resistance to flare, bokeh, colour reproduction or distortion. Each of these factors can, IMHO, in suitable conditions ruin a picture much more effectively than a slight difference in MTF numbers in EX class lenses.

Cheers,

-Topi Kuusinen, Finland

rb2105 said:

I have to admit that I have never been happy with my 30mm 1.4.
Maybe I got a bad one. I love my 50mm EX prime and my 24-70mm F2.8
EX. If I had it to do over again, I would have gotten the 18-50mm
EX instead of the 30mm. I will either get the 18-50mm next or the
10-20mm EX.

Click to expand...

The 10-20mm EX is EPIC! One of my favorite lenses..along with the 30mm & 70-200mm Ex DG....lots o' shots with 'em.
Cheers!
Chebb
http://www.pbase.com/thechebb

Chez Wimpy said:

Are related to misfocussing lenses. For some people (and never
with mine) this is an issue of miscalibration to the body, and in
other cases the difficulty of achieving focus with a f1.4 lens in
low light. Unless you own a lot of fast primes, it is hard for
users to put the Sigma results in context. The other caveats are
"cone" shaped bokeh near the corners when shooting open with small
point light sources in the background, and uneven sharpness across
the frame (though the lens is a good deal more consistent than my
17-40L as far as that is concerned).

Sigma lens on Sigma body should render the focus issue moot. The
color, contrast, sharpness, and resistence to flare on the 30/1.4
are second to none. In general the bokeh (excluding the cone
potential) is first class. This is one of the best lenses for a
crop digital sensor, and would be the first lens I would get if I
went with a Sigma body.

Click to expand...

Thanks CW.

I really do prefer a prime over a zoom, esp . a short zoom like the 18-50. The 30 1.4 sounds nice. I am still a bit concerned how I wil like quick sharpness falloff and CA. I must say that the HSM sounds very inviting.

The 18-50 2.8 Macro is a newer lens. It looks as if improvements were made over the older 18-50EX. The 'newness' is very appealing to me. Presently I am finding that I really like the length on my Nikon 35/f2. It is a very used lens for me. So more than likely the falloff on the 18-50 will be better at 24-35mm or so.

Thinking ahead, I wil probably get the 70mm prime or 50mm. Then perhaps the 50-150. And if I need shorter end(considering how I like the 18-50 at shorter end)I can look into that later.

Really appreciate your help. Please let me know your thoughts.

Mike