Panasonic 25mm f1.4 or Sigma 30mm f1.4

[starocker]

hi guys..im using an oly E3..wanted to get a brighter prime lenses..so i sold of my "pancake" lens..n going to sell of my old manual nikon primes also, 35mm f2 and 50mm f1.8.. so which lens should i get?and are they in the same price range?

 

[egnaro]

hi guys..im using an oly E3..wanted to get a brighter prime lenses..so i sold of my "pancake" lens..n going to sell of my old manual nikon primes also, 35mm f2 and 50mm f1.8.. so which lens should i get?and are they in the same price range?

based on brand new price, Leica 25mm F1.4 is slightly more then double the price of Sigma 30mm F1.4.

Brand new Sigma 30F1.4 shd be ard $800

 

[starocker]

based on brand new price, Leica 25mm F1.4 is slightly more then double the price of Sigma 30mm F1.4.

Brand new Sigma 30F1.4 shd be ard $800

ah!ok..haha..i've heard some stuff like there are front and back focusing problems for the sigma 30mm f1.4? and also a good copy and bad copy of the lens?

i oni know that if the front or back focusing is off they can calibrate it..rite? but if i get a bad copy of the lens, what can i do?or what should i look out for?

 

[egnaro]

ah!ok..haha..i've heard some stuff like there are front and back focusing problems for the sigma 30mm f1.4? and also a good copy and bad copy of the lens?

i oni know that if the front or back focusing is off they can calibrate it..rite? but if i get a bad copy of the lens, what can i do?or what should i look out for?

this Front or back focusing issue much depend on luck i think.. I used a 30F1.4 with my E3 before, no issue at all, but when my frz use it on his E3, here the back focusing issue.

well, u need to send it to Sigma service centre together with your lens and body, they will calibrate the lens for you free.

 

[starocker]

this Front or back focusing issue much depend on luck i think.. I used a 30F1.4 with my E3 before, no issue at all, but when my frz use it on his E3, here the back focusing issue.

well, u need to send it to Sigma service centre together with your lens and body, they will calibrate the lens for you free.

so bad copy of the lens jus means focusing problems?

 

[egnaro]

I think so. even i use 30F1.4 for a while, still I dun have much knowledge on this lens. btw u can read up at sigma sub forum under 30f1.4 user and read up for more infor

 

[gazkw]

there is the risk of getting a lens that is not sharp at all for every lens brand. hence you should always test before buying.

but so far i have not heard of any complaints in that regard before.

yes, bad copy for the 30mm f1.4 typically means back/front focusing issue which can be calibrated to solve.

 

[tomcat]

based on brand new price, Leica 25mm F1.4 is slightly more then double the price of Sigma 30mm F1.4.

Brand new Sigma 30F1.4 shd be ard $800

Don't think that the Leica 25mm is that expensive. I got mine new for ~$1,200+ only.

 

[egnaro]

Thanks for updating the price.

TS, I think u still can get it ard 1100 at B&S section.

 

[synapseman]

It depends on the lens/body combo, I think.

I've got the Sigma 30/1.4, and I noticed that if I were to focus on a particular point (for example, a person's eye), the rate at which it can bite into focus is somewhat inconsistent. Maybe only 60% success rate for this particular type of static subject. Shooting wide open, focus just a little off means the shot is ruined. But when it does get the focus right, the result is absolutely wonderful. For this reason, using this lens to shoot wide open at moving subjects isn't really a good idea.

I noticed that the more expensive lenses are more reliable in this sense. The Sony 50/1.4 (a "normal" series lens) focuses well, but is soft wide open. On the other the Carl Zeiss 85/1.4 focuses reliably (although quite sluggishly) and is very sharp even wide open. So in essence, you do get what you pay for. Since the Leica 25mm isn't that much more expensive, it might be a better investment actually.

 

[dorts]

It depends on the lens/body combo, I think.

I've got the Sigma 30/1.4, and I noticed that if I were to focus on a particular point (for example, a person's eye), the rate at which it can bite into focus is somewhat inconsistent. Maybe only 60% success rate for this particular type of static subject. Shooting wide open, focus just a little off means the shot is ruined. But when it does get the focus right, the result is absolutely wonderful. For this reason, using this lens to shoot wide open at moving subjects isn't really a good idea.

I noticed that the more expensive lenses are more reliable in this sense. The Sony 50/1.4 (a "normal" series lens) focuses well, but is soft wide open. On the other the Carl Zeiss 85/1.4 focuses reliably (although quite sluggishly) and is very sharp even wide open. So in essence, you do get what you pay for. Since the Leica 25mm isn't that much more expensive, it might be a better investment actually.

Agreed. The Leica 25mm f/1.4 is pretty sharp wide open based on pictures.

Why pay for a lens which you can't use wide open?

 

[synapseman]

Agreed. The Leica 25mm f/1.4 is pretty sharp wide open based on pictures.

Why pay for a lens which you can't use wide open?

Exactly right. I once bought a 3rd-party brand f/2.8 lens. It was so soft @ 2.8 that it looked like I was shooting through a soft-focus filter! I was then told that "it get shaper at f/4". What's the point then??

It is through this experience that I've learnt that for smaller aperture lenses, as far as IQ goes, the difference between original brand and 3rd party isn't that great. But for f/2.8 and above, the difference gets quite noticible.

Then again, I have to say that the Sigma 30/1.4 *is* a sharp lens, even at f/1.4. Just that I find it a bit more difficult to get consistently good results (lens finding correct focus).

 

[starocker]

It depends on the lens/body combo, I think.

I've got the Sigma 30/1.4, and I noticed that if I were to focus on a particular point (for example, a person's eye), the rate at which it can bite into focus is somewhat inconsistent. Maybe only 60% success rate for this particular type of static subject. Shooting wide open, focus just a little off means the shot is ruined. But when it does get the focus right, the result is absolutely wonderful. For this reason, using this lens to shoot wide open at moving subjects isn't really a good idea.

I noticed that the more expensive lenses are more reliable in this sense. The Sony 50/1.4 (a "normal" series lens) focuses well, but is soft wide open. On the other the Carl Zeiss 85/1.4 focuses reliably (although quite sluggishly) and is very sharp even wide open. So in essence, you do get what you pay for. Since the Leica 25mm isn't that much more expensive, it might be a better investment actually.

ya i do agree..why get a lens that i cant use wide open..so mayb i should start saving for my FUTURE baby..haha..

 

[synapseman]

The price difference is clear : the Pannyleica, when available, retails for about double the price of the Sigma. I am trying to consider budget here.

Even if you would come to the conclusion that the Pannyleica is the objectively better choice of the two lenses, then the question remains if the Sigma is not going to offer me as good a value, if I consider it as value-for-money.

I got a suggestion: Go try both. If you aren't poisoned by the Leica, then clearly the Sigma will be the choice. :bsmilie:

 

[starocker]

I got a suggestion: Go try both. If you aren't poisoned by the Leica, then clearly the Sigma will be the choice. :bsmilie:

hmm good ide..haha..but anywhere to suggest on where to try?