Going to buy a Sigma 28mm f/1.8... if

Joined
Dec 12, 2006
Messages
666
Location
Narberth, PA
You folk approve. Any reviews of this lens and sample pictures from it. I like it cause it is wide, 77mm filter size, 1.8f stop, and cheapish.

Thanks in advance for the input.
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2007
Messages
4,808
Location
Collecchio, northern Italy
Ciao Guy,
let us know some more of that lens.. I'm thinking to use it for low light and general snapshot (28mm = 42mm) both on film and digital slr.. what's its better aperture range? Any noticeable problem?

Thanks.
 
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
1,239
Location
Utica, NY, USA
Barry,

This is a nice little prime lens that I have used occasionally in the past two years specifically for it's macro features , both digital and film, and with reasonable results. For the price it's not bad at all.

I also used it to shoot a series of portraits with a D70 at a friend's high school reunion. I never tried it on my D2X, so I don't know how it reacts to a higher # of pixels.
 
Joined
Mar 5, 2006
Messages
519
Location
Taipei, Taiwan
Good lens, but I wouldn't call it "little" unless comparing it to lenses well outside its range. It's about as big as the 28/1.4 Nikkor, and takes BIGGER filters.

I didn't like the size of it, but loved the optics. Similar to the 50/1.8 Nikkor in terms of sharpness wide-open. Great for closeup work, where it excels, but also good at infinity. AF can be quirky and unreliable, and the AF/MF switching mechanism is kinda annoying. Manual focus is OK, but not as good as a dedicated manual lens.

The size and AF turned me off enough to sell it and opt for a 28/2.8 AIS Nikkor instead. I think I like the optics of the Sigma more, but the size and mechanics of the AIS win out for me.
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2005
Messages
4,437
Location
Denver, Pennsylvania, uSA
Crap, I deleted my post!

Anyway, I absolutely love my 28/1.8. I use it quite a bit. Focus isn't too bad on my D70. It is a large-ish lens, but it balances well. On my N6006 it feels too heavy. I shoot quite a bit at 1.8. I am pleased with the performance. If I can, though, I take it to f2-2.8. I think it's beautiful there.

I say to go for it!
 
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
1,239
Location
Utica, NY, USA
Good lens, but I wouldn't call it "little" unless comparing it to lenses well outside its range. It's about as big as the 28/1.4 Nikkor, and takes BIGGER filters.

Robert,

It's just a matter of speech, it's not so little as you commented:

Specs:
FOCAL LENGTH 28 MM
FILTER SIZE MM 77
F/STOP f/1.8
MINIMUM FOCUS 7.9''
MAGNIFICATION 1:2.9
ANGLE VIEW FIXED: DEGREE 75.4
GRPS/ELEMENTS 9/10
MAX DIA. 3.3''
WEIGHT 1.06#
LENGTH 3.1''
ED X
D X
WEIGHT IN GRAMS 480

The size and weight are not objectionable to me, since it is affordable...
 
Joined
Apr 6, 2006
Messages
278
Location
Albany OR
I have the 20mm 1.8 and really like it. For the smaller sensors these seem to work well. I wish it were smaller but then again I wish for many things.
 
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
1,706
Location
New Zealand
Since you have a D200, a viable alternative is the AiS 28/2. It's only 1/3 stop slower than the Sigma 28/1.8 but has a good reputation for sharpness wide open - which the Sigma does not have. It may turn out that the for "usable" speed, the Nikkor is faster. The Nikkor is also very resistant to ghosting so is suitable for shooting into the sun. It focuses to 0.25m, not as close as the Sigma, but very good for this focal length and speed (the 28/1.4 only gets to 0.35m). The Nikkor is also very compact - it takes 52mm filters.
 
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
811
Location
San Diego CA
I have been looking at picking this lens up. the speed and FL are just what I would want for some indoors baby pictures. I'm using the 50 1.8 now and its just a bit tight. I'm always having to back up to the back wall to get her all in the shot.

This lens is 254 at sigma4less.com although they seem to be iffy on stock. maybe a 30 1.4 would be a little bit faster but its more $ and I'm on a budget with the new family and the wife quiting her job here soon.
 
Joined
Mar 30, 2006
Messages
3,629
Location
Springfield, VA & Cape Charles, VA
I used to see a fair number of posts on various forums about the 20/1.8, 24/1.8, and 28/1.8 and which of three was the best. They all get votes. My 20/1.8 was slightly soft wide open but very sharp from 2.8 to f8 and I loved the close focus capability. I sold it because I used the Sigma 12-24 much more often and, frankly, think its better at 20mm than the 20/1.8. I also have the 28/1.8 which I like very much and can recommend highly. I can't speak to the 24/1.8 having never used it, but I suspect it's well worth the price. Check out the lens reviews on FredMiranda.com.`
 
Joined
Dec 12, 2006
Messages
666
Location
Narberth, PA
Thank you everyone for the comments now i am even more torn because of the mixed reviews any links to 28 f2's ais'???
 
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
811
Location
San Diego CA
I want a fast normal prime. only other option would be the 35 F2 or the 30 1.4and I would really rather stay with nikon. its a shame they are getting rid of some 35mm lens and not making dx prime lens.....
 
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Messages
1,743
Thank you everyone for the comments now i am even more torn because of the mixed reviews any links to 28 f2's ais'???
Barry -

At one time I had the Nikkor 28/2, Nikkor 35/2, Nikkor 24/2.8 and Sigma 30/1.4 all at the same time. The 28/2 was clearly the sharpest of the bunch. Unfortunately I sold mine here at the Cafe a couple of months ago.

DAB
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom