30mm worth it

The 30 delivers better IQ than the 20-50. It is also faster - thus it can deliver a limited amount of subject isolation at f2 - and smaller. With the 30 on, a NX three or four digit body really can ride in a coat pocket.

Now, the 20-50 is one of the best kit lenses out there for IQ, and the 30 does not address its biggest shortcoming, the slow focusing.

Only you can decide if the improvement on the already good IQ and smaller size is important to you.

As for me, the 30 is on 90% of the time, the 20-50 the rest, and the 16 very occasionally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Arn
Just be warned however that it is noisy when focusing, and it doesn't have image stabilization. And the focusing isn't the fastest or most accurate. But despite these flaws, I use it as my main lens because it's light, small, bright, and great image iq.
 
Last edited:
I have 30mm, 20-50, and 16. I use the 30 most, 16 after that and to be honest since I got the two primes the 20-50 doesn't see much action. The 30 is definitely the best in terms of image quality. Another point, I seem to remember that you're quite new to photography, Dave, is that true? I think the f2 of the 30mm is helpful in learning about depth of field.
 
I started with the 20-50, and got the 30 a year later. It was a revelation. Pocketable on my NX100, wide aperture and a great focal length for the type of subjects you would shoot in low light indoors. Its size makes it very unintimidating for the people you're shooting; it looks like a compact camera.
I can easily shoot in locations where using the 20-50 would be impossible. Your trip to the aquarium would probably have been much more photographically rewarding. ;-)
 
yes I'm new to photography maybe 6wks, so all I have is nx300 with 20-50 now I like all areas but mainly as I have 2young children they get most of the clicks, so I also do to have a fortune to spill out in gear so I'm going to add a lens an as the 30mm is quite close too 50mm@35 an 50mm is close to our eyes then that be a good choice also my knowledge an experience says the lower the f.stop the possibility for a better picture an that it be faster AF than 2050 for kids moving, but in the other hand I had considered 50-200 as this gives me a new area too experience....
 
For moving kids the 45mm f/1.8 (save money and get 2D version unless you want to do 3D) is a better choice since it focuses more than twice as fast, and the longer focal length is great for that shallow depth of field.

I like the 30mm when I want a really small camera system with a usable lens even in low light. I.e. 30mm is better general purpose lens than 45mm.

Telephoto can be nice too, 50-200mm will let you explore how much you like using telephoto lenses (some use these not at all, others live with them on the camera).

Set your kit lens at 30mm and 45 or 50mm and see which you like better. The 30mm does offer exceptional image quality, but the 20-50mm is not bad at that setting.

Eric
 
Last edited:
I replaced my kit lens with the 30mm and pretty much haven't taken it off since. Find it almost perfect for everyday use. IQ is so much better than the kit lens, I recently retried my older lens and felt very disappointed , even when I know how good that lens was.
 
The 45 focuses faster than the 30mm is what he meant

I don't have the 45mm, and I used to regret getting the 30 over the 45, but the pocketability/portability of the 30mm was such that I am using it much more than I would have if it were bigger. The 30mm is a better all-arounder that kind of replaces the 20-50 pretty well, so I'd go with that if you will be bringing your camera to places. If portability is not the important to you, I'd say def go with the 45.

My current line-up of lenses is as follows: 20-50mm, 30mm, 60mm macro, 85mm portrait, 50-200mm zoom. All I'm really missing is something like a 10mm fish-eye or 12-24mm for some better landscapes. I had bought the 60mm so that my gf could use it but she's now my ex and I kind of regret that purchase since I don't really do Macro and my 85mm does everything else better imo. my 30mm sees maybe 65% usage the 85 maybe ~25% and the 50-200mm 10-15%. I like how the 30mm prime helped me work the scene more than the 20-50mm did and that helped my photography a bit
 
Are you saying the 45 2d focus faster than the 2d/3d version or the 45 fists faster than the 30
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/108602759@N03/
Sorry, 45mm focuses faster than 30mm. It uses a different focus motor and a different lens design which focuses internally making it very fast focusing (and quieter).

The 30mm is easily worth the money, I just like the fast focus of the 45mm for certain things.

Eric
 
The 30mm is easily worth the money, I just like the fast focus of the 45mm for certain things.

Eric
A big +1 to this Eric. Also for me the iFn is an excellent feature of the 45mm that the 30mm is lacking.
 
I also agree. It's time for samsung to produce a mk2 for its 300mm, a bit bigger (say 2mm longer) but with the same focusing tech of the 45 mm and iFn.
 
Seems about a third of NX users have the 30mm on their camera more than other NX lens....as you can see by the green tick on the attached poll...I do as well:) So yes, I think its well worth to have the 30mm.

09fbcc8da32a4d329c776e5c4c16267e.jpg.png
 
Last edited:
the 45 fists faster than the 30
lol...ahem

What I love about the 30mm with the 20mp sensor is its so useable in most situations that would have been more appropriate with a longer fl. Cos you can then crop it while maintaining great picture quality.
 
The 30 is definitely worth it, got mine for $200 from B&H, was a sale earlier this year. Currently they are offering it for $222 with free shipping in the states, did you say pounds though?, probably not free shipping for you then T.T. I haven't had the opportunity to use the 45, but it should also be good. The reasons I got the 30mm over the 45 are that 1. it was and as far as I have seen still is cheaper, 2. makes my NX300 fit easily in my coat pockets, 3. is close to 50mm equivalent. How do you feel about manual focus? Just because for me, the most fun lens I have used is actually the Canon 50mm f/1.8 FD lens with adapter. The adapters for FD/NX can be found cheap on ebay, and these old 50s can be found easily for ~$20. It can also give you an idea on how much nicer the fast f-stop is indoors over the kit lens.
 
I got the 30mm lens for Christmas. Going through my pictures I see a huge jump in IQ improvement from my 18-55 since I got the lens. Most of my shots are indoor with family and this lens is helping with lighting and shallow depth of field techniques.

The biggest reason I like this lens is that it makes my camera super portable. That's why it stays on the camera all the time now. Also it's a good all around focal length.

There are gripes as there's no buttons for Fn or AF/MF . (Not that I use those buttons much anyway). Also I do find it very difficult to take pictures of moving subjects indoor. I just take a bunch of pics and get only a few that turn out in focus when kids are running around.

I'm still a beginner at snapping shots but here are 3 examples using the 30mm lens. First to show some simple blurring. Second and third to show an indoor portrait shot without flash and some background defocusing. No processing added on these.

The pros of this lens outweigh all of the cons by a large margin. Great all around lens and changes the NX300 into a portable beast excellent for street shooting (last shot).

ca51e473bafe40009aaf7ad1fdb3621e



6e1c5a8979e048bf9bc75a96697c50b8.jpg





c4825b55d8a048078728f873308a0712.jpg



65c2adcd57bb4cafad14e701d1d32544.jpg
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top