Canon 28mm F1.8 USM v Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM Photo Gallery by lightrules at pbase.com

Canon 28mm F1.8 USM v Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM

Dec 22 2006

Canon 28mm F1.8 B&H Pricing $400
Sigma 30mm F1.4 B&H Pricing $430 [Comes with hood and pouch]

GENERAL COMMENTS: After having only recently completed my test between the Sigma 30EX and Canon 35L (see http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/30v35_2nd ), I was looking forward to seeing how the Canon 28f1.8 performed. In terms of image quality per se, the EX is the stronger performer. The Canon at f1.8 (wide open) renders a hazy look, and stopping down even only 2/3 a stop helps tremendously. The Sigma at f1.4 (wide open) does not have any haze to it, is sharper at f1.4 than the Canon is at f1.8, and contrast is very high on the Sigma, though stopping down of course helps too. When both are at f1.8, the EX is quite a bit sharper and more contrasty. The EX is at its highest resolution and contrast numbers at f5.6, while the Canon reaches its peak around f8. In terms of flare, the Canon really takes a hit; the EX performs at an extremely high level (see the 30EX v 35L flare test too) while the Canon 28 performs similarly to its 35L sibling -- not very well. CA is also a poor spot for the Canon, and bokeh is more pleasing with the EX. Distortion control and light falloff go in favor to the Canon (again, similarly to the 35L). As to focusing, I had no problems with either during testing; both were "bang on" in the AF department.

The Canon 28 is a very fine lens, and I can see now why it has its following. The build is good (a small version of the 85f1.8), performance is a bit better than its 35f2 sibling, its AF (with ring USM and FTM) is swift and silent and smooth, and ergonomically, it's a very small and light package that will work on both APS-C and FF. I think more "highly" of this lens now that I've used and handled it, and again, I can see why some folks would opt for it. That said, IMO the Sigma EX is still the one to have as a "standard prime" on APS-C. Given that the EX is priced around the $400 mark, comes with hood and pouch, delivers superior optics (though make sure focusing is accurate), and is an "f1.4" lens, it remains the APS-C standard prime of choice.

OVERALL ASSESSMENT
Resolution (center): S10, C8
Resolution (edge): C10, S9
Contrast: S10, C8
Distortion (barrel): C10, S8
Light Fall-Off: C10, S8
Flare: S10, C7
CA: S10, C8
Bokeh: S10, C7
Build: TIE
Handling: TIE
AF (noise): C10, S9
AF (speed): C10, S9
AF (lowlight): C10, S9
Bang for Buck: S10, C8

01	02	03	04
05	06	07	08
28 Weight	30 Weight	Main Tests: Resolution - Contrast - Bokeh - CA	Flare
Barrel Distortion

comment |

Guest		07-Dec-2011 23:44
Based on these comments and other reviews, it sounds like the Sigma is superior only if you're prepared to send it back to Sigma when you get a bad one, whereas the Canon generally works the first time.

Guest		19-Oct-2011 16:04
Thanks for the comment, Lightrules. I find that primes deliver noticeable detail improvement over even the best L zooms. For example, I find the 50 1.8 II to deliver "wow" sharpness compared to the 17-55 and 17-40L (these are great, but a notch behind in sharpness "pop", IMHO). I would use the Sigma 30 1.4 for indoor shooting, and for landscapes.

lightrules		16-Oct-2011 03:26
Hi Michael, the Sigma is completely fine for landscapes, especially since you plan to stop down. But why not use a standard zoom lens for landscapes? No need for a prime. Enjoy!

Michael		14-Oct-2011 14:35
Great test, Lightrules. I much prefer these head to head comparisons with real world photos than some test chart that doesn't show much. That said, is the Sigma 30 1.4 OK for landscapes? I appreciate the finer detail a prime brings to this kind of photography. My 50 1.8II had great corner sharpness at F4 aon up. Does the 30 1.4 compare well? Thanks.

lightrules		13-Oct-2008 23:53
Thanks for the comments, Orion. Hope you enjoy your lens set up. Primes are lovely, aren't they? ;)

Orion		13-Oct-2008 15:08
Lightrules, your tests are maybe the best on the web! I've purchased Sigma's 30mm 1.4 for 1 year ago, after reading all the tests and criticism I could find, though I had no idea about your site then. My first copy was really flawed, inconsistent focus and visibly soft right side even at f4. But what a wonderful colors, contrast and sharpness in the centre even at 1.4 when I could make it focus right! So I exchanged it for a new copy, which I must say is gorgeous in every way, AF included. I liked it so much that I bought one more fixed lens the same month - Canon 85mm f1.8!!! I only wish the 30 would cover properly the sensor of my 1D Mark II N too... Having said that I think that the coma abberation of the Sigma 30mm is pretty strong at medium-long focus distances, but never really a problem.

JM		25-Mar-2008 23:00
Thank you very much for the reasurance. I did owned Sigma 24-70/2.8 and I was not very happy with its focusing abilities, so now I'm a bit paranoid about Sigma and focusing. When I called Sigma they offered to correct the problem but I had to send them my CanonXTI so they could correct it. I've never heard of such a thing, so I didn'd do it. Thank you again. It's very kind of you.

lightrules		25-Mar-2008 19:56
mist07, I have never used an XTi with the 30EX, so I cannot comment on its AF performance. Now generally-speaking, the x0D series bodies do have better AF abilities than the XT-series bodies, and a lens like the fast 30 f1.4 will certainly "appreciate" the AF abilities of the x0D bodies. I know with even comparing my 20D and 40D, the 30EX performs better on the 40D, especially with the outer-AF points with regards to AF accuracy. On the other hand, I know of plenty users happy with their 30EX and XTi combos, so it really shouldn't be a big hindrance for you to use this combo. It's a superb lens through and through.

JM		25-Mar-2008 18:10
From some of the comments I read that Sigma 30/1.4 does not focus well on Canon XTI. Does it pertain to all Sigmas 30/1.4, and what do I do if the one I'll buy will have focusing problem? Can one fix it, and how? Thank you for all of the tests, you've done a great JOB!!!

Som		10-Mar-2008 00:57
Hi, Wanted to update you on my purchase of Sigma 30EX. Excellent lens, and I am having fun with it. Also acquired the Tamron 28-75 f2.8, and Sigma 18-200OS is on its way. Thankyou very much for your advice, and your tests.. Highly appreciate it.

Patrick holland		07-Mar-2008 23:54
I love my sigma 30 although while on my Rebel XT it wouldn't focus right at all.. but while on my 30d and on my 1d MarkIIN it is my GOTO lens...

lightrules		06-Mar-2008 17:19
The 30EX is designed for 1.6x bodies, though it will physically mount to 1.3x and FF (and will also vignette). So the 30EX is not a "FF" lens by design, though it will mount and is still usable (with vignetting).

airbutchie		06-Mar-2008 17:01
LR... You mentioned that the 28 1.8 is compatible with FF bodies. However, is the Sigma 30 1.4 compatible with a FF body as well? Thanks in advance!

RichieV		02-Dec-2007 18:18
Hi Lightrules. If I have read your reviews correctly, the Sigma 30mm f1.4 is an overall better lens than the Canon 28mm f1.8, 35mm f1.4L and 50mm f1.4. If this really is the case then I think Sigma must be doing something right. I am also impressed by the fact that you think the Sigma 150mm f2.8 macro puts up a good performance against the Canon 135mm f2L. Thanks for taking the time to do all these tests. Richie

lightrules		31-Aug-2007 22:21
Ed, for crop bodies, the EX is the one to get. I just don't see any good reason (other than FF compatibility, which of course "changes the lens" in a sense due to a resulting totally different FOV) to opt for any other "30-something" prime. The Canon 28 is a fine lens, and smaller too, but if you're looking for all-out optical quality, it doesn't get any better than the 30 f1.4.

ed		31-Aug-2007 18:28
hi, i was wondering... is there any reason why one should get the canon over the sigma (aside from being able to use it on FF and the possible risk of having to re-chip for newer bodies)?

Guest		18-Jul-2007 22:24
I was having the hardest time choosing between these two lenses only a couple of days ago. Too bad I didn't come across your test sooner, but I did end up getting the Sigma and so far I love it!

lightrules		21-Mar-2007 22:42
That is indeed good news to hear. Now go and use it and enjoy it to the fullest. Mine gets a lot of use!

KRobA		21-Mar-2007 22:04
Hi Lightrules, After being at Sigma UK for 4 weeks, I finally got my new 30 1.4- they said the previous one was not sharp enough and was going back to Japan for a major repair! True the new lens is simply superb optically and the Canon 28 1.8 has just been sold on ebay! Much better focussing accuracy most of the time on the new copy too- does default to front focus in some lower light situations but keeping it due to the OUTSTANDING image quality at f/1.4- this copy is simply brilliant. (Sigma also sorted out my slightly front-focussing EX 150 2.8 macro). Thanks for all your posts on dpreview and site here with advice to send to sigma instead of playing lens roulette- got there in the end!

lightrules		02-Feb-2007 02:22
KRob, my (Sigma-adjusted) 30f1.4 delivers some of my highest "keeper" rates of ALL my lenses. Out of my 10 lenses I currently own/use, it is my only APS-C designed lens and easily one of my sharpest and most accurate-focusing. It is as reliable as my 85f1.8, if not more. My guess is that a trip to Sigma would help your situation. Keep us informed. Enjoy.

KRobA		01-Feb-2007 23:31
Hi Lightrules, Amin, Just picked up another sigma 30 1.4, really pleased with the optical quality. In this copy the AF is generally of adequate accuracy;... but sometimes it can be way-off (random front or back focussing from shot to shot on the same subject, usually in lower light levels). I've done a series of tripod-tests with my 400D and 20D with the new 30 1.4 and canon 28 1.8 and found that the same types of subjects infact challenge both lenses/cameras- just that the sigma for some reason is usually out by somewhat bigger margins (at the same aperture of course). Could this be improved by a trip to Sigma? (Lighrules: Is your 30 1.4 every bit as accurate in low light as your 35 f/2 for example?). I will keep practicing though for the time being though as the "pop" and "wow" factor in the lens at ~ f/2 is brilliant when I get spot on focus. Thanks for the excellent reviews!

lightrules		23-Dec-2006 16:51
Amin, regarding the AF of the EX, at least in regards to THIS particular, calibrated copy, the EX AF is "bang on" and my keeper rate is very high. I have full confidence shooting it at f1.4 near or far. Prior to calibration, it was unreliable, but post-calibration, it's very accurate. So my comments in this test still stand vis-a-vis AF performance of the Sigma. In low light, it's as good as the 35L (see other test). Given a properly-functioning copy of the EX, it really is an amazing optic through and through. That said, I have an appreciation for the 28f1.8 now that I hadn't had earlier. I would certainly consider it for a FF body myself if the FOV was to my liking.

KRobA		23-Dec-2006 09:30
Hi Lightrules.... Your tests at f/2.0-f/2.5 are really useful, just like I've seen with my copy and as indicated on www.the-digital-picture.com. Amazing how the visible purple finging and haziness (not lack of resolution as such) just goes away on the highlight borders (just like with the 50 1.4 ?). The sigma's performance wide open though is amazing I must say may try one again one day! Thanks again for taking the time to post.

Amin		23-Dec-2006 06:40
Obviously calibration can improve the accuracy of a lens, but I have a hard time understanding how it could improve precision. Despite my difficulty believing your statements about the Sigma AF (no offense meant), you have given me cause to consider trying another copy. Thank you again Jo jo. -Amin

Guest		23-Dec-2006 04:34
One more comment I forgot to add. The bokeh advantage for the Sigma was also a surprise. The degree to which the Sigma bokeh is superior is something I hadn't picked up on when I did the comparison. If that eats away at my mind long enough, I may have to try another copy of the Sigma. LOL.

Guest		23-Dec-2006 04:01
Nicely done, as always. I am not surprised by the results, except that the 2mm difference in FOV was more than I thought it would be! The one major observation I disgree with here is your statement that the AF on the Sigma is "bang on." I tried a Sigma 30, and my copy did not front or back focus. It focused fine, so I don't think it was a bad copy in that respect (most "bad" copies supposedly frontfocus); however, in low light it did not AF in the same class as the Canon, which got way more keepers. Thus I don't think that getting a good copy of the Sigma allows one to get the best of all worlds - one still gives up something in AF reliability with the Sigma.

lightrules		23-Dec-2006 01:11
Rob, the test is posted here http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/image/72007402/original

KRobA		22-Dec-2006 17:44
Nice tests as ever Lightrules. Thanks!!! It would be great if you could add ~ f/2.2 to your resolution tests. Both lenses are clearly excellent in the centre by f/2.8 but the Canon 28 1.8 suffers in your tests wide open (as does my copy). If you could post some tests at f/2.0 and/or f/2.2 that would help people think about this lens as my copy really improves here...so much so that I never shoot at f/1.8 when I can shoot f/2.0 or f/2.2.

Toney Smith		22-Dec-2006 12:54
Jojo _ your test results are pretty much in line with Photozone between these to lens. I've been eying a fast fixed focal lens for low light indoors stuff, 30mm or under as the 50's aren't wide enough for my liking. Thanks for your real world samples. Toney

click on thumbnails for full image