Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 is my main lens when shooting sports. It is a handy reach for a gym (Roller Darby) or a dirtjump/BMX track. Aperture of f/2.8 means that shooting at ISO800 in a badly-lit gym will often enough give me acceptably short times to freeze action with shutter speed and/or use flashes at lower power (so they recycle quicker).
The focal range of 50-150mm on a Nikon DX camera is the same as a 75-225mm on a full-frame (35mm), which is pretty much the standard sports telephoto range all the way from film times - but with this lens it comes in a surprisingly compact package! The price you pay for weight savings is that the lens is DX-only (Sigma call it DC). The HSM version auto-focuses even on Nikon D40/x/60 cameras.
When buying this lens I was replacing the Nikon AF-S 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 VR which I was disappointed with for a number of reasons. You get what you pay for with that lens, at least in build and physical construction. I dunno why I was expecting a pro lens at a hundred'n'fiddy squid. Aperture of 5.6 is useless for trying to freeze fast moving people with low shutter speed (VR or no-VR has no effect on that). I needed something with a tough build and f/2.8 or faster.
Looking at the options that I could afford and was willing to carry around, I chose this Sigma lens above the more expensive and heavier options. I played with the idea of one of the AF-S 70/80-200mm f/2.8 Nikons or Sigma's version of the same range. I haven't regretted this choice since I got the lens about 6 months ago.
Nothing external moves on this lens - it has internal focusing and zoom. The whole thing feels very solid; lot of the exterior seems to be metal - the two rings each have their own rubber pattern and turn very smoothly. The lens is not sealed against weather, but it does have a lot fewer "entry points" for dirt/moisture than other lenses in this price range. It is also affordable compared to (supposedly much better, but much larger/heavier) Nikon f/2.8 glass which costs 2-3 times as much.
The only thing I mind is no optical stabilization. It would have been useful in a telephoto lens combined with f/2.8 aperture. Focusing from 1m is OK but not great.
I also feel a lot of wrist strain (biking injuries catch up) when using a telephoto with the D40's small grip - although that's something that would be even more of an issue with the Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 VR that I was thinking of as my first choice until I found this sturdy little thing at 50% of what I was about to spend.
There are some reviews at:
Pop Photo, ePhoto Zine,
and a Flickr Group
Monday, June 30, 2008
Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Sigma 30 mm F1.4 EX DC HSM
If you own a Nikon D4o(x) or D60 there is no other lens like this one. Nikon is being a bit slow catching up with itself and are only very few AF-S prime lenses available at this point. Since the above bodies will not focus with lenses without an internal motor, one gets no choice when choosing a 'normal' lens for a D40.
The lens was launched by sigma in February 2005. A lot has been written on various forums about Sigma's quality control, good samples, bad samples and corner softness of this lens. I don't know much about these things. I picked my lens from Jessops and never bothered photographing a chart or even a brick wall. In real-life use I haven't noticed any problems. At f/1.4 the depth of field is really shallow, to the extent that focusing on the tip of somebody's nose will render their ears/eyes soft, but that's the price that has to be paid for being able to take pictures at reasonable shutter speeds in very dark places.
Shallow depth of field: shot at 1/40s at f/1.4
Optically speaking it is excellent for my purposes. There is no distortion; there is no CA to speak of (anyway you don't really have to deal with CA in low-light shots). The colours are nice and when you stop the lens down a bit it is sharp and crisp. It has more than enough definition for my camera's chip and the bokeh is very acceptable. I haven't noticed much flare even with light sources in the frame; bright lights get a nice eight-pointed star.
CA: 1/250 at f/5.6 - some (out of focus) CA is noticeable in the top part of the picture.
The lens belongs to Sigma's EX range - supposedly that means better quality. Personally, I can't say anything about non-EX Sigma lenses - however compared to the kit lens or to the Nikon 55-200mm VR, this lens is much better built. The barrel and the petal-shaped hood are both finishes in nice satin paint, the lens comes in a very good box-shaped cordura case with a belt loop. Although the lens thread is made of plastic, the bayonet and most of the outer barrel is metal and the lens has a reassuringly solid feel. I have knocked mine around a little bit (dropped it with the camera from about waist high on concrete, shot with it in mild rain) and it seems to be holding up very well, except for a few small places where I actually managed to scratch the paint and realized that the outer barrel is indeed made of metal.
This is the second lens I bought for my Nikon D40. It quickly became my every-day lens and I really love it. I would highly recommend it to anyone with a Nikon D40/x or D60 over the kit lens (which is slow and plastic) or the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 which won't auto-focus on those bodies. It is affordable (just about), fast, solidly built and compact. Don't let yourself be put off by a few vocal nit-pickers on certain forums, or look for a different lens if you do take pictures of well lit brick walls. There is no reason you'd want this lens for a Nikon D3 or a Canon 5D (in fact you could not even use it on a full-frame body - because it is a DC lens that does not cover bigger than APS-C size sensors). There is one fewer reason why get this over the cheaper 50mm f/1.8 if your body can auto-focus with non-HSM or non-AF-S lenses (Nikon D80 upwards), except HSM offers reportedly faster focusing. Ken Rockwell says :-) that if you shoot Canon the Canon 28mm f/1.8 EF is a better choice for less money. I don't know about Canon. I know that for entry-level Nikon SLRs it has no competition in its class, but it is very far from a "one-eyed king of the blind"; it is actually a really good lens.
Focal Length: 30 mm
Maximum Aperture: F1.4
Minimum Aperture: F16
Lens Construction: 7 Elements in 7 Groups, 2 ED elements
Angle of View: 45°
Diaphragm: 8 blades
Minimum Focus Distance: 40cm
Maximum Magnification: 1:10.4
Filter Size: 62mm
Dimensions (diameter x length): 76mm x 59mm
Weight: 406.7g
Links to other reviews:
- ePhotoZine
- Ken Rockwell
- The-Digital-Picture.Com
- PBase samples page 1, page 2
- whichlens.com
- PhotographyReview.com
Flickr groups:
