Sigma 30/1.4 for interiors/real estate shots

deadwolfbones · 10-09-2009, 10:18 AM

Hi guys,

I just pulled the trigger on the Sigma 30/1.4. I've been wanting the lens for a while, for myself. But this weekend I have my first semi-pro gig shooting the ranch of a certain actress for my employers, a luxury real estate magazine. I'll be shooting mostly exteriors, but they've said there are a few indoor shots they want to get and my only fast prime was the 50/1.4. I considered the 28/1.8 from Sigma as well, but as I've said, I've wanted the 30 for a while, it's faster, and it's only 2mm difference.

My question is, I know the 30 has softer edges, particularly wide open. How evident will this be in architectural interior shots? How well does it clean up by, say, f/2?

Thanks.

edit: obviously that's not all I plan to use it for. ;]

Last edited by deadwolfbones; 10-09-2009 at 10:24 AM.

farfisa · 10-09-2009, 10:56 AM

Sounds like a fun gig!

I did own the Sigma 30 1.4 for a while, but never would have though to use it for architectural interiors, especially close to wide open. Not especially wide, for starters, and the corners just never become great.

I'd just take one of your other sharp lenses there, stop down and shoot with a tripod, unless you're going for a depth of field effect where corner sharpness wouldn't really enter into it.

But if you just want to buy the 30/1.4, I'm ok with that

RBellavance · 10-09-2009, 11:09 AM

All I can say is: make sure you don't leave your Sigma 10-20 at home for the interior shots.

audiobomber · 10-09-2009, 11:16 AM

Originally posted by deadwolfbones

My question is, I know the 30 has softer edges, particularly wide open. How evident will this be in architectural interior shots? How well does it clean up by, say, f/2?]

The interior of the house won't move, so why not use a tripod and F8?

I agree with RBellavance, you're going to want something a lot wider than 30mm for this gig.

kenyee · 10-09-2009, 11:26 AM

Gotta wonder why you'd want to shoot at f/2 for real estate as well. Most people want everything in focus...
And the 10-20 makes a great lens :-)

deadwolfbones · 10-09-2009, 12:40 PM

eheh, I guess I just wanted to talk myself into it. oh well, should be good for portraits of the actress.

ramair455 · 10-09-2009, 01:06 PM

Why did you go with the 30 1.4 instead of the 28 1.8? I had both; got rid of the former because there was no comparision between the two when shot wide open.

deadwolfbones · 10-09-2009, 01:15 PM

Originally posted by ramair455

Why did you go with the 30 1.4 instead of the 28 1.8? I had both; got rid of the former because there was no comparision between the two when shot wide open.

Mostly because I've heard about the 30's legendary (center) sharpness wide open. Supposedly the ultimate people lens (was kinda hoping it's ok for interiors as well, but that's alright that it isn't).

dugrant153 · 10-09-2009, 02:43 PM

haha... I think you and I were drooling about the Sigma 30mm F1.4 when someone else posted a review on it. And we both got it!

I would definitely go with something wider if you want to cover most of a room in one shot. Unless it's a reallly reallly big room, but then you'd still want the wide for that.

One more thing to note about the Sigma 30mm is the mild barrel distortion. This might throw off your image a bit, especially straight-edge windows. I'm with the others on this one: wider angle lens would work best

However, if I were to shoot just portions of a big room (and I had space to move around) and make a composite photojournalistic portrayal of the room, then I think a 30mm might be okay in that regard.

deadwolfbones · 10-09-2009, 02:50 PM

Thanks for the info. We are looking to get a lot of detail shots, as the "real estate photography" type shots are largely covered. I think the 30's DoF might be very useful there.

dave9t5 · 10-09-2009, 02:57 PM

Originally posted by ramair455

Why did you go with the 30 1.4 instead of the 28 1.8? I had both; got rid of the former because there was no comparision between the two when shot wide open.

ramair,

I'm very interested to hear more about your impressions of these 2 lenses. Both are on a short-list of mine for a fast (usable at f/2) slightly wide normal lens (<35mm FL) for low-light shooting.

The 30/1.4 has gained a some favour among users here in PF and I've seen some great shots with it. It's also been extensively objectively reviewed (photozone.de, SLRgear.com, etc.). If the maximum magnification (it's 1:10, would prefer 1:6) wasn't abysmal, it would be a straightforward decision.

The 28/1.8 is more difficult to find users and reviews, but the few images that I have seen from it have been wonderful. The 1:3 max. magnification is a huge creative bonus. If it wasn't such an enormous lens (almost as big as my body), it would be a straightforward decision.

deadwolfbones · 10-12-2009, 09:59 AM

Guess I got pretty lucky. My 30/1.4 has very good sharpness at 1.4, great by 1.7, and brutal by 2. Very pleased with this lens!

axl · 10-12-2009, 02:34 PM

Originally posted by dave9t5

ramair,

I'm very interested to hear more about your impressions of these 2 lenses. Both are on a short-list of mine for a fast (usable at f/2) slightly wide normal lens (<35mm FL) for low-light shooting.

The 30/1.4 has gained a some favour among users here in PF and I've seen some great shots with it. It's also been extensively objectively reviewed (photozone.de, SLRgear.com, etc.). If the maximum magnification (it's 1:10, would prefer 1:6) wasn't abysmal, it would be a straightforward decision.

The 28/1.8 is more difficult to find users and reviews, but the few images that I have seen from it have been wonderful. The 1:3 max. magnification is a huge creative bonus. If it wasn't such an enormous lens (almost as big as my body), it would be a straightforward decision.

now... you are either very smalll person or the lens is bigger than I thought

anyway, bigger lenses are not always bad, of course depends on personal preferences...
anyway, have you thought of FA31ltd??? That one is definitely usable even at f1.8

Peter

dave9t5 · 10-13-2009, 08:55 AM

Originally posted by axl

now... you are either very smalll person or the lens is bigger than I thought

anyway, bigger lenses are not always bad, of course depends on personal preferences...
anyway, have you thought of FA31ltd??? That one is definitely usable even at f1.8

Peter

LOL, took me a second to catch that one.

My camera's body is a K-m , chosen for size more than any other factor. I travel alot for business and saving a few grams here and a few cc's there is critical for carry-on-ability. Another issue is handling, the K-m is ~600g loaded and the Sigma 28/1.8 is a front-heavy 500g, not the best balance formula.

Ya, the FA31/1.8 is an good mix of size and speed, so it's on my list but not in my budget.

axl · 10-13-2009, 01:13 PM

Originally posted by dave9t5

LOL, took me a second to catch that one.

My camera's body is a K-m , chosen for size more than any other factor. I travel alot for business and saving a few grams here and a few cc's there is critical for carry-on-ability. Another issue is handling, the K-m is ~600g loaded and the Sigma 28/1.8 is a front-heavy 500g, not the best balance formula.

Ya, the FA31/1.8 is an good mix of size and speed, so it's on my list but not in my budget.

true, it's not the smallest one, but it's fabulous lens to own...
good luck choosing...

BR
Peter

PS: if size really matters you should look at 40ltd, it's quite a bit narrower than 30/31 and slower BUT it won't be beaten in size/performance ration!!! Hands down... I own both 31 & 40 and have put both through their paces...

10-09-2009, 10:18 AM	#1
deadwolfbones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: La Crescenta, CA Posts: 7,450	Sigma 30/1.4 for interiors/real estate shots Hi guys, I just pulled the trigger on the Sigma 30/1.4. I've been wanting the lens for a while, for myself. But this weekend I have my first semi-pro gig shooting the ranch of a certain actress for my employers, a luxury real estate magazine. I'll be shooting mostly exteriors, but they've said there are a few indoor shots they want to get and my only fast prime was the 50/1.4. I considered the 28/1.8 from Sigma as well, but as I've said, I've wanted the 30 for a while, it's faster, and it's only 2mm difference. My question is, I know the 30 has softer edges, particularly wide open. How evident will this be in architectural interior shots? How well does it clean up by, say, f/2? Thanks. edit: obviously that's not all I plan to use it for. ;] Last edited by deadwolfbones; 10-09-2009 at 10:24 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
What is the best ultra wide lens for real estate photography?	HermanLee	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	11-07-2010 11:54 AM
Real estate pictures	trishytee	Photographic Technique	20	05-19-2010 09:17 AM
Real Estate Photography	spun	Photographic Industry and Professionals	16	08-12-2009 09:43 AM
15mm limited for interior/real estate photography?	joeyc	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	25	07-08-2009 02:05 PM
Real Estate Fair	free fire	Post Your Photos!	1	12-11-2008 04:51 PM

10-09-2009, 10:56 AM	#2
farfisa Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Toronto, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,274	Sounds like a fun gig! I did own the Sigma 30 1.4 for a while, but never would have though to use it for architectural interiors, especially close to wide open. Not especially wide, for starters, and the corners just never become great. I'd just take one of your other sharp lenses there, stop down and shoot with a tripod, unless you're going for a depth of field effect where corner sharpness wouldn't really enter into it. But if you just want to buy the 30/1.4, I'm ok with that

10-09-2009, 11:09 AM	#3
RBellavance Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Near Montréal, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,716	All I can say is: make sure you don't leave your Sigma 10-20 at home for the interior shots.

10-09-2009, 11:16 AM	#4
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by deadwolfbones My question is, I know the 30 has softer edges, particularly wide open. How evident will this be in architectural interior shots? How well does it clean up by, say, f/2?] The interior of the house won't move, so why not use a tripod and F8? I agree with RBellavance, you're going to want something a lot wider than 30mm for this gig.

10-09-2009, 11:26 AM	#5
kenyee Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Boston, PRofMA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,026	Gotta wonder why you'd want to shoot at f/2 for real estate as well. Most people want everything in focus... And the 10-20 makes a great lens :-)

10-09-2009, 12:40 PM	#6
deadwolfbones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: La Crescenta, CA Posts: 7,450 Original Poster	eheh, I guess I just wanted to talk myself into it. oh well, should be good for portraits of the actress.

10-09-2009, 01:06 PM	#7
ramair455 Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Okc Photos: Gallery Posts: 284	Why did you go with the 30 1.4 instead of the 28 1.8? I had both; got rid of the former because there was no comparision between the two when shot wide open.

10-09-2009, 01:15 PM	#8
deadwolfbones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: La Crescenta, CA Posts: 7,450 Original Poster	Originally posted by ramair455 Why did you go with the 30 1.4 instead of the 28 1.8? I had both; got rid of the former because there was no comparision between the two when shot wide open. Mostly because I've heard about the 30's legendary (center) sharpness wide open. Supposedly the ultimate people lens (was kinda hoping it's ok for interiors as well, but that's alright that it isn't).

10-09-2009, 02:43 PM	#9
dugrant153 Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Vancouver, BC Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,059	haha... I think you and I were drooling about the Sigma 30mm F1.4 when someone else posted a review on it. And we both got it! I would definitely go with something wider if you want to cover most of a room in one shot. Unless it's a reallly reallly big room, but then you'd still want the wide for that. One more thing to note about the Sigma 30mm is the mild barrel distortion. This might throw off your image a bit, especially straight-edge windows. I'm with the others on this one: wider angle lens would work best However, if I were to shoot just portions of a big room (and I had space to move around) and make a composite photojournalistic portrayal of the room, then I think a 30mm might be okay in that regard.

10-09-2009, 02:50 PM	#10
deadwolfbones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: La Crescenta, CA Posts: 7,450 Original Poster	Thanks for the info. We are looking to get a lot of detail shots, as the "real estate photography" type shots are largely covered. I think the 30's DoF might be very useful there.

10-09-2009, 02:57 PM	#11
dave9t5 Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Toronto, Canada & Taichung, Taiwan Photos: Albums Posts: 329	Originally posted by ramair455 Why did you go with the 30 1.4 instead of the 28 1.8? I had both; got rid of the former because there was no comparision between the two when shot wide open. ramair, I'm very interested to hear more about your impressions of these 2 lenses. Both are on a short-list of mine for a fast (usable at f/2) slightly wide normal lens (<35mm FL) for low-light shooting. The 30/1.4 has gained a some favour among users here in PF and I've seen some great shots with it. It's also been extensively objectively reviewed (photozone.de, SLRgear.com, etc.). If the maximum magnification (it's 1:10, would prefer 1:6) wasn't abysmal, it would be a straightforward decision. The 28/1.8 is more difficult to find users and reviews, but the few images that I have seen from it have been wonderful. The 1:3 max. magnification is a huge creative bonus. If it wasn't such an enormous lens (almost as big as my body), it would be a straightforward decision.

10-12-2009, 09:59 AM	#12
deadwolfbones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: La Crescenta, CA Posts: 7,450 Original Poster	Guess I got pretty lucky. My 30/1.4 has very good sharpness at 1.4, great by 1.7, and brutal by 2. Very pleased with this lens!

10-12-2009, 02:34 PM	#13
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183	Originally posted by dave9t5 ramair, I'm very interested to hear more about your impressions of these 2 lenses. Both are on a short-list of mine for a fast (usable at f/2) slightly wide normal lens (<35mm FL) for low-light shooting. The 30/1.4 has gained a some favour among users here in PF and I've seen some great shots with it. It's also been extensively objectively reviewed (photozone.de, SLRgear.com, etc.). If the maximum magnification (it's 1:10, would prefer 1:6) wasn't abysmal, it would be a straightforward decision. The 28/1.8 is more difficult to find users and reviews, but the few images that I have seen from it have been wonderful. The 1:3 max. magnification is a huge creative bonus. If it wasn't such an enormous lens (almost as big as my body), it would be a straightforward decision. now... you are either very smalll person or the lens is bigger than I thought anyway, bigger lenses are not always bad, of course depends on personal preferences... anyway, have you thought of FA31ltd??? That one is definitely usable even at f1.8 Peter

10-13-2009, 08:55 AM	#14
dave9t5 Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Toronto, Canada & Taichung, Taiwan Photos: Albums Posts: 329	Originally posted by axl now... you are either very smalll person or the lens is bigger than I thought anyway, bigger lenses are not always bad, of course depends on personal preferences... anyway, have you thought of FA31ltd??? That one is definitely usable even at f1.8 Peter LOL, took me a second to catch that one. My camera's body is a K-m , chosen for size more than any other factor. I travel alot for business and saving a few grams here and a few cc's there is critical for carry-on-ability. Another issue is handling, the K-m is ~600g loaded and the Sigma 28/1.8 is a front-heavy 500g, not the best balance formula. Ya, the FA31/1.8 is an good mix of size and speed, so it's on my list but not in my budget.

10-13-2009, 01:13 PM	#15
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183	Originally posted by dave9t5 LOL, took me a second to catch that one. My camera's body is a K-m , chosen for size more than any other factor. I travel alot for business and saving a few grams here and a few cc's there is critical for carry-on-ability. Another issue is handling, the K-m is ~600g loaded and the Sigma 28/1.8 is a front-heavy 500g, not the best balance formula. Ya, the FA31/1.8 is an good mix of size and speed, so it's on my list but not in my budget. true, it's not the smallest one, but it's fabulous lens to own... good luck choosing... BR Peter PS: if size really matters you should look at 40ltd, it's quite a bit narrower than 30/31 and slower BUT it won't be beaten in size/performance ration!!! Hands down... I own both 31 & 40 and have put both through their paces...