Overlapping focal length question regarding the Sigma 19 & 30

Discussion in 'Sony Alpha E-Mount Lenses' started by Sabre36, Feb 27, 2013.

  1. Sabre36

    Sabre36 TalkEmount Regular

    Dec 1, 2012
    For those of you that have the Sigma 19 and 30mm along with other lenses in the same overall local length, do these lenses get used as much as your others?

    I have the Sony 10-18/4.0 and 35/1.8. I especially like the 35 and have mixed feelings about the 10-18mm, although am using it more lately (usually ~10-12mm). Because of the price, I an contemplating the Sigma 19 and 30 but wondering if I'd use either because of similarities to the focal lengths which I already cover? I can sort of see the 19mm (or forthcoming Sony 20mm) being a smaller, prime alternative to the 10-18mm, but am not sure it is enough - regardless of the attractive price. And, is the 30mm too close to the 35mm I already have (would it get used)?

    What I really want is an affordable 24mm (don't we all).

    Your thoughts and experience welcome...

  2. olli

    olli TalkEmount Veteran

    Aug 16, 2011
    Washington DC
    I have both and use the 30 quite regularly, the 19 less so, but (apart from the kit lens) I don't have any alternatives. For me, I've been thinking about buying the 35 but I'm undecided. If it did not have the OSS I wouldn't bother but having that does add something significant to the package. Going in the other direction though, I think if I already had the 35 I don't think I would buy the 30.

    However, if I had the 10-18 I would still be interested in the 19. The 19 is smaller and lighter and the difference between f4 and f2.8 is more important to me than the difference between f2.8 and f1.8. Also, I've reached a point where I like shooting with primes.

    So if I were I your shoes I wouldn't be looking at the 30 but I would be looking at the 19 (and more the 19 that the 20 purely on price considerations.) And like you what I really want is an affordable 24.
  3. Bill

    Bill TalkEmount Veteran

    Oct 22, 2012
    Brisbane, Australia
    I have the 10-18mm and was tempted by the Sigma 19mm. If I didn't have the 24mm, I would have bought it because of its reputation for IQ, its speed, and its price.
  4. Grisu_HDH

    Grisu_HDH TalkEmount Veteran

    Dec 16, 2012
    Southern Germany
    I guess this depends on your personal goals you want to achive with your images and which are your prefered motives...
    What are your mainly things your shooting? Landscape, portraits, Street, Allround? Do you like lens switching on th road and carrying all lenses with you?

    As you can see in my signature I don't have a lens palette too big...
    So from my point of view if I had the Sony 10-18 and the Sony 35 I wouldn't need a Sigma 19 or 30.
    I prefer even the 18-55 to be flexible and to not bothering about lens switching when my wife is with me and shots with my NEX too. That's it! Because she doesn't care about primes, she wants some zoom to be flexible, so why not?
    If I choose the gear I try to cover most of the focal lengths so I take the 16f28, the 16-55 and the Sigma 30mm with me... or my manual 28mm or 50mm if I want the manual oldschool feeling...
    so most of the decision is about your preferences and I alwys suggest not to point image quality at the first spot.

    The best camera is the one you have with you! ;) ;) ;)
  5. alterstill

    alterstill TalkEmount Rookie

    Feb 27, 2013
    Since I have SEL1018F4, SEL24F18Z and SEL35F1.8 I only use Sigmas when I want to go 'light' i.e. I take body and these two lenses in my pockets. For the price I wouldn't be able to refuse them anyway :D
  6. gio

    gio TalkEmount Veteran

    Sep 12, 2012
    Manchester, uk
    I rarely try to cover all focal lengths on one trip, I will take the cz 16-80 ,the 16mm wide angle adaptor and the fishey adaptor (for fun) and thats me, I have only had the 30mm on my camera once, a good lens but I never reach for it, this selection suits any photos I would like to take,it would be a rare occasion that I would ever used the 16-80 at anything over 50mm,generally with wide angle zooms (10 - 20mm) it is virtually always, that the photographer uses the widest end of the zoom.
  7. Nubster

    Nubster TalkEmount Veteran

    Jan 5, 2013
    West Virginia, USA
    I personally prefer primes. Right now, if I walked out the door with my camera gear, I'd take with me the 24mm, 38mm, and 50mm. I might throw in one of the Sigmas just so I had an AF option. If I took my DSLR, I'd pack my 30mm, 50mm, and 90mm. Those focal ranges plus a little foot work will get me pretty much anything I need unless I really need to reach out for shooting sports or wildlife, which I rarely do.

    In your situation, if your happy with the Sony 35mm, I'd skip the Sigma 30mm. As far as a 24mm...you can get a legacy 24mm, the Rokkor version is excellent and not a lot of money, if you don't mind MF. Not sure what to suggest with the 10-18. Unless you went with an 8mm fisheye, I don't think there's anything native as wide as you are using. The 16mm f/2.8 might be close enough.
  8. Bimjo

    Bimjo Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Oct 28, 2011
    Washington State
    Regardless of whether you want to stay all AF lenses or not the 10-18 is as wide as you're going to get on a aps-c sensor. Zeiss is bringing out a 12mm prime in the future. Sure to be a great lens, sure to cost mucho dinero.

    The Sigma 30 gains you nothing (arguably) over the faster SEL35 except size. The Sigma 19 may be sharper than the 10-18, but that depends on what your photographic output needs are- large prints or social media/web. The 10-18 has OSS as well, which can help in low light even though it's a max f/4 lens.

    If you need really small lenses in the 24mm range and can handle manual focus you should look at rangefinder lenses. They aren't particularly fast (at least the tiny ones), but they image quality is second to none. Look at these examples by WoodWorks with the Voigtlander 25mm f/4 which are pretty damn good by any measure.

    I'd hang loose for a couple of months if you can to see what comes out between now and this summer. Tamron is way overdue to uncork something in e-mount.

    Decisions, decisions… :)
  9. dbmiller

    dbmiller TalkEmount Top Veteran

    Mar 2, 2012
    New England
    I haven't used my 18-55 since I got my 19 and 30 Siggy's. Xmas also got me the SEL50/1.8, so I really have no use for the 18-55 anymore. The 55-210 remains in the bag. I rarely use the LTM lenses of late, but the 12mm is usually in the bag, and if I have room, my film camera carries the LTM 50/1.8.

    I've thought about the 35/1.8, but agree that it's just too clone to the 30/2.8. If money were no object, I might want it instead of the siggy, but it didn't exist when I bought mine. The Zeiss 24mm is just way out of my range.

    The 10-18 might be interesting, but I opted for the VL 12mm LTM which I can use on the NEX and my old Canon.
  10. freddytto

    freddytto TalkEmount All-Pro

    Dec 2, 2011
    Puebla, Mexico
    well, I'm a street shooter, so I prefer fixed focal lengths, I like to use the 50mm f/1.4 / f/1.7 (Rokkor), also my favorite was the Industar-50 28mm f/2.8 (equivalent to 42mm on nex ), so it was ¡¡¡¡ , because I sold today, it really hurts me, but after the arrival of the sigma 30mm, I think don´t need anything else, I like to AF, very sharp, very good contrast, and very compact it fits in your pocket.

    I have the 16mm f/2.8, but to be honest I prefer the 19mm is definitely better, now if anyone is interested in it, is on sale now.

    Self-portrait 3 nex5R with Sigma 30mm
    Self-portrait 3 by Freddytto Robles, on Flickr
  11. Peter Zapp

    Peter Zapp TalkEmount Rookie

    Jan 3, 2013
    The 10-18 is not that large, heavy or slow to spend extra money on a 19. At least for reasonable static subjects the OSS is good for more than the f4 versus f2.8 loss. But I would buy the 19 for any older NEX body without in-body lens correction and without EVF.

    My preferred kit is 10-18 and 50 or 35 alone. Apart from its price the 24 is just to close to 18 or 35. In principle the 50 is to close to 35, too. But I had it first and it was not that expensive.
  12. Sabre36

    Sabre36 TalkEmount Regular

    Dec 1, 2012
    The feedback all makes perfect sense and hopefully will help me curb lens lust in acquiring more than I will use. I started out with 4 Canon and Minolta adapted lenses. After a trip to Budapest, it was clear that the two lenses I mentioned, the 10-18 and 35, were not only getting used more often, but they returned predictably sharper, focused images. I have culled the MF lenses to just one, a Rokkor 50mm, definitely a keeper.

    Common sense say to wait for something I don't yet have, but I don't always operate on common sense. I still want the Zeiss 24mm, but this isn't happening anytime soon.

  13. Bimjo

    Bimjo Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Oct 28, 2011
    Washington State
    And what photographic enthusiast does? :rofl:
  14. zemosabe

    zemosabe TalkEmount Rookie

    Jan 3, 2013
    If you get the 19mm for $100-$150 then you might be less tempted to spend $1100 on the 24mm Zeiss. Theoretically it could save you $1000.

    In all seriousness - the image quality, size, speed and minimum focus distance of the 19mm make it a lens I don't leave home without. I have the SELP1650 and SAL1680Z with LA-EA2 but the sigma beats each in 3/4 of those categories. Have not pulled the trigger on the 30mm for fear that it will keep me from getting the SEL35F18.
  15. Peter Zapp

    Peter Zapp TalkEmount Rookie

    Jan 3, 2013
    The 24 initially was the only lens that performed well and adequate for the NEX-7. It is on backorder with many retailers incl. the Sony store which means, perhaps in view of the price, they either got surprised by the demand or are reluctant to keep it in stock. But there is no equivalent lens for APS-C DSLRs and all cheap 35/2 lenses for full-frame SLR are old designs. So no reason to complain about the 24's price. The main issue I have with the 24 is its size which fails to take advantage of the mirrorless concept. It is really frustrating to see that even the Summicron-M 35/2 is smaller than the 24, even despite of full-frame coverage.

    The reasons to go for NEX-3/5 rather than NEX-6/7 are size and prize. That means 19/30 rather than 24. Using the LCD, at waist level or at extended arm, rather than the EVF means you can and will get closer to the subject, at least if the subject are people. So in doubt go for the shorter lens, i.e. 19 rather than 24.
  16. dbmiller

    dbmiller TalkEmount Top Veteran

    Mar 2, 2012
    New England
    I also remembered I did a comparison of the 30mm to the 18-55 (Along with a couple of my LTM) lenses. That was done in this thread.

    I didn't use the 19mm that day, but for me, the 19mm and 30mm Sigma's perform just about the same.