photo sharing and upload picture albums photo forums search pictures popular photos photography help login
Type your message and click Add Comment
It is best to login or register first but you may post as a guest.
Enter an optional name and contact email address. Name
Name Email
help private comment
Miljenko Devcic | profile | all galleries >> tech >> Lens reviews and tests >> Sigma 30mm f1.4 vs Nikkor 35mm f2.0 tree view | thumbnails | slideshow

Sigma 30mm f1.4 vs Nikkor 35mm f2.0

Lens pic
Lens pic		 Cafe front, pic center
Cafe front, pic center		 Cafe front, pic edge
Cafe front, pic edge		 Theatre front, central crop
Theatre front, central crop
Theatre front, upper left pic corner
Theatre front, upper left pic corner		 Resolution and chromatic abberation
Resolution and chromatic abberation		 Resolution vs width
Resolution vs width		 Vignetting & distortion
Vignetting & distortion
Focusing Sigma
Focusing Sigma

comment | share
Joep 04-May-2011 11:33
Maybe the Sigma has more contrast. The image will appear sharper.
Miljenko Devcic01-Dec-2006 09:57
Hi Ed, I do understand your doubts about chart vs real life pics discrepancies. This issue has being extensively discussed after this test release in DPReview Nikon lens forum. There are basicaly two causes: a) Seriously large number of Sigma 30 samples (including the one tested) have focussing problems. Shooting resolution chart requires spot-on focusing. Please check an additional chart at the end of this page: "Focusing Sigma". b) Real life scene is not 2-dimensional object like res chart. Most lenses (including Sigma 30) doesn't have flat focus plane. This is the reason you do get much sharper 3D objects at the edges than resolution chart might suggest. In case of Sigma 30 the main concern is definitely focusing reliability. Sample tested gave me just 1 out of 10 spot-on focusing accuracy with D70. Lately I tried another sample on my D200 with the similar results. So I'm still hesitant about getting one for my private use.
Guest 29-Nov-2006 23:58
Thank you very much for taking the time to compare this two lenses. I took the time to check all the photos and charts you posted and I really can't understand the big difference in what the charts show to what I can see on the pictures. To my eyes I see the sigma with better resolution, sharpnes and CA. Like in the chair picture there is very much CA on the nikkor and not as much on the sigma. I see a lot better resolution from 1.4 to 4.0 on the sigma than what the charts show. Why is this? Could it be the distance from where you take the pictures for the imates. Maybe the Nikkor is better at that distance than the Sigma and the sigma is better on longer field. Don't take me wrong, I have the Sigma 30mm and I love it and see that my pictures compare in quality to the ones posted, I just don't get the charts, not because I dont understand them but because the pictures don't reflect that. Edwin Cruz
Guest 27-Mar-2006 15:18
Az blagodaria :) Pozdravi, Mihail
Miljenko Devcic27-Mar-2006 10:09
Mnogo blagodarya, Mihail. Sigma 30f1.4 is actualy sharper than Nikkor 35f2 at all apertures WHEN the focus is spot-on. Unfortunately, this was not always the case with the sample tested and my D70. And the issue is presented in "Focusing Sigma" chart. Resolution fluctuation is presented due to different focusing method: manual or AF and latter was performed using two methods; moving from infinity mark or from the closest distance setting. Opticaly, you can consider highest values for every aperture. Unfortunately, it was not always achievable due to unreliable focusing.
Guest 24-Mar-2006 13:26
Great comparison! Looking at the photos the Sigma seems sharper in most cases. However the test charts show the Nikon has more resolution. Could you help me understand? For CA my visual impression of the sigma having a bit more seems to be supported by the charts.

And I don't know how to interpret the Focus chart - could you explain? Thanks!
click on thumbnails for full image