Monthly Archives: October 2006

Ninja Origami and the pinhole camera!

Ok, I know that worldwide Pinhole Photography Day is over for this year but what better time than to be thinking about your next pinhole masterpiece. What’s more these guys have just the camera for you. That’s right! No more messing around with cereal boxes or old tobacco tins. Now you can release the pinhole Ninja in you and whip-up a state-of-the-art pinhole camera faster than Jackie Chan can re-load a Leica :)

Instructions and cool looking 3D how to here at linatree.com >>

Charley Peters: Constructed truths

Charley’s visually arresting narratives juxtapose complex diametrically opposed realities using a combination of self-presentation and still life techniques with almost Zen like simplicity.

It is this artful combination of simplicity of form and complexity of ideas that makes her work so seductive. We are confronted by conflicting symbols and without realising it, find ourselves embroiled in the complex subjectivity of truth and reality.

Check out Charley’s work at http://www.charleypeters.com.

Observations on the Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM Lens

Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM Lens for Canon Digital SLR CamerasUntil early 2005 a fast normal prime lens for an APS-C class DSLR meant either a 35mm f/2 or going into hock for a 35mm f/1.4. Having been impressed with the general consensus with regards to the Sigma 30mm f/1.4′s performance I decided to purchase this lens in August 2006 as my primary walk-around lens for my new Canon EOS 30D. After using it for two months I felt ready to talk about my experiences with it.

Resolution

The sharpest lens that I have ever used was my Carl Zeiss 45mm f/2 Planar--until now. Plainly put, the centre performance of  the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is spectacular. MTF Tests at Photozone place its centre performance on a par with Canon’s 35mm f/1.4; with Canon’s 35mm f/2 catching-up with both the Sigma and Canon 1.4′s by middle aperture. Border performance on the other hand sees Canon 35mm f/1.4 equalling it’s f/2 cousin’s centre performance at f/2 with better border performance at f/1.4 than the other lenses obtain at the borders throughout their entire aperture range. So, how much of a difference are we talking about for all practical purposes?

I ask this, because much has been made of the Sigma 30′s mediocre border performance below f/8. However, I’m inclined to believe that Sigma’s MTF50 border performance at wide apertures is more to do with field curvature issues than poor edge resolution. Specifically, I find that subject matter that is composed and focussed at the borders of the frame even wide-open contains ample detail. So, unless I was going to be photographing flat-field subjects at close range then I couldn’t see any practical optical advantage to purchasing the Canon 35mm f/1.4 L over Sigma’s 30mm f/1.4 unless perhaps I was going to do a lot of low-light flat-field work in museums and alike.

Bokeh

The bokeh of the Sigma AF 30mm f/1.4 at wider apertures and close range is nothing short of sublime. More importantly, it’s very forgiving of distracting specular highlights which is not surprising when you consider that it has 8 aperture blades.

Construction, size and handling

Some reviews have waxed lyrical about Sigma’s EX crinkly finish. I wish I could subscribe to that point of view. The EX finish is reminiscent of a soft, fine spray on finish that wears off if you even look at it--just kidding. However, it abrades very easily as I discovered on my Sigma 50-500mm and I would put the external finish of these lenses as not quite as good as some of the better Canon Consumer lenses (i.e. 85mm f/1.8) and certainly a long way from the professional ‘L’ series construction of the 35mm f/1.4. However, at a third of the price of its ‘L’ counterpart who cares :)

Size wise, the Sigma is twice that of the Canon 35mm f/2 and around 35% lighter and smaller than the Canon 35mm f/1.4. It balances quite well on my 30D but you may want to look at the Canon 35mm f/2 for your Digital Rebel if you’re looking to keep the size and balance in check and can dispense with the extra stop. The focussing ring is reasonably well dampened for manual focus but not as smooth as the Canon 85 f/1.8 but certainly better than the loose and scratchy focus ring of the Canon 24mm f/2.8. Needless to say that dedicated manual focus lenses are streets ahead in this regard.

Photo: Fork-n-PeaDepth of Field scales are absent as seems to be de rigueur nowadays alongside both Canon and Nikon. I really miss these not so much for the scale focussing ability but just so I could get an easy idea about what my DOF would be at a particular aperture. For instance, if I know I can only shoot at f/1.4 it would be handy to calculate my lens to subject distance for my required depth of field straight off the lens itself rather than having to try and remember distance scales or carry around a piece of paper.

Auto-focus on my Canon 30D is fast, silent and very accurate. However, I do find that it’s best to confirm focus by repeated half-depressing of the shutter button until the AF motor is silent--then I know the focus is nailed. That being said however, the majority of my use of this lens in under manual focus.

The lens hood is a mild petal type and can be reverse mounted on the lens. However, it’s strictly AF mode at this point as the hood completely covers the focussing ring--not a shortcoming and to be expected really.

Summary

All said, the Sigma AF 30mm f/1.4 is a very accomplished piece of glass and a testament to Sigma’s commitment to practical rather than theoretical performance issues when designing their lenses. By this I mean that Sigma could have spent a significant amount of R&D; building a close range flat field corrected lens to boast better MTF chart performance and gain bragging rights but instead focussed on delivering a sharp, practical and value for money lens that would be appreciated by the average camera punter like me.

Thank you Sigma, from the bottom of my wallet!

Related Links

Sigma’s new 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC MACRO lens

I don’t usually comment on the annnouncement of new lenses but this announcement had me come over all deja-vu. “Que?” I said to myself. Didn’t Sigma release this very same lens over 12-18 months ago?

In fact Phil over at DPReview states that this “should be an interesting alternative to the often poor kit lenses bundled with sub-$1000 digital SLRs” and I guess technically he’s right except that this smacks more of a cosmetic upgrade than a significant re-design. Now, don’t get me wrong I love Sigma lenses in fact I bought and own three of them for my Canon 30D and all three I consider near to or at the top of their class.

So, what’s the difference then between Sigma’s new 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC MACRO lens and their year old 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC. The answer is: not a lot. They have managed to shave three inches off the close focus distance (down from 11″ to 8″) and may have either replaced an SLD element with an ELD or added an ELD element (it’s not clear from their online literature). So, yes this may assist with the identified chroma issues that the non-macro lens suffered from and that’s a good thing. However, for me a real upgrade to this lens would have added quieter and faster HSM focussing and even Sigma’s OIS (Optical Image Stabilisation) would have been a bonus as an alternative to Canon’s 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM.

It will be interesting to see what the optical reports of this lens translate to. For me at this stage I still see Tamron’s AF 17-50mm f/2.8 SP XR Di II LD Aspherical IF as the class leader in the APS standard zoom range. It has excellent edge to edge performance wide-open and does not suffer the reported veiling flare problem that plagues Canon’s 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM.

 Scroll to top