DSLRUsers.com

Hi
Just got this combo,
The lens is a LOT heavier than the kit lens
Focusing is also faster and better in lowlight then the kit lens
Thought some of you might like to see it together, as its really the only fast prime lens that can AF on the D40. Who says D40 owners only stick to the kit lens

As u can see its also a very nice fit, but makes the camera very front heavy.

That D40 looks pretty fat

It sure looks big on the D40, wonder how it will look with a 70-200VR on it

Yi-P wrote:That D40 looks pretty fat

It sure looks big on the D40, wonder how it will look with a 70-200VR on it

Ozbeachside took a photo of a 80-200 mounted to it for me recently

does the 30 1.4 come with a hood at all?

It looks like a good fast prime that i'd like to have

D40 + 45mm f/2.8P Pancake will be an ultimate 'pocket' camera. Wonder who has this combo here.

Kyle wrote:does the 30 1.4 come with a hood at all?

Yes it does. You're welcome to play with mine if I've got it on me next time we meet. Must say, I'm pretty pleased with it.

Lets see some pictures

MCWB wrote:

Kyle wrote:does the 30 1.4 come with a hood at all?

Yes it does. You're welcome to play with mine if I've got it on me next time we meet. Must say, I'm pretty pleased with it.

I'm interested to see and try samples with the 35mm f/2, have you got a chance to test them on? hmm... I guess not...

bumthology wrote:Hi
Just got this combo,
The lens is a LOT heavier than the kit lens
Focusing is also faster and better in lowlight then the kit lens
Thought some of you might like to see it together, as its really the only fast prime lens that can AF on the D40. Who says D40 owners only stick to the kit lens

Hi.... "bumthology".. Have you got a regular first name..???

Anyway, it's been a while since this was posted, and I was curious on how you are finding this lens? From all the reports and owners on forums say that it's excellent in low light (which you would expect f/1.4), but it quite often misses focus in regular light. Did you find this or has your copy worked well... And are you finding the D40 working well for you...??

Would be nice to see some of you examples from it....

Thanks mate......
From another Adelaide Guy.....
C.Ya.....
Wally..........
Adelaide,AUSTRALIA
Nikon D50, D80, SB600
Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D AF | 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED AF-S DX | 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF
Nikkor 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G AF-S | 28-70mm f/2.8D ED-IF AF-S | 80-200mm f2.8D-ED AF
Tokina ATX 12-24mm f/4 AF Pro DX | Kenko 1.4x Pro300 DG TC
~=If dogs don’t go to heaven, I want to go where they go=~

I have my eye on the 30mm, love to see some pics through the lens

Yi-P wrote:That D40 looks pretty fat

It sure looks big on the D40, wonder how it will look with a 70-200VR on it

THe 70-200 would look similar to this (80-200)

Or the beast...

hi Sox
In lowlight the lens performs well, however in orange light (mood lighting) it can be a bit soft.
Its perfectly sharp under flourescent lights and outdoors.
I bought this lens to the motorshow and every picture turned out sharp, which made me forget the doubts i had before when i only tested it in my room with a dimming incandescent.

Anyways in one of my shots i could even see my friends single nosehair hang out. !

any way of knowing how this lens would compare to the nikkor 35mm F2?

Yi-P wrote:That D40 looks pretty fat

It sure looks big on the D40, wonder how it will look with a 70-200VR on it

i was actually in at diamonds, and i saw the d40/40x for the first time, in person.

ITS TINY! the body is not much bigger than point and shoots from a few years back.

incidentally, i got a quote on a 30mm 1.4. $529. Not bad, considering its australian delivered... and its out of stock overseas.

too bad i have already blew my budget, with my shopping spree at B&H, otherwise i wuold have bought it on the spot. the store in adelaide said they had 7 left, i might have to get one in a few weeks, eh... 1.4 would be handy

wider wrote:any way of knowing how this lens would compare to the nikkor 35mm F2?

i would also be interested in the answer to this,

id prefer the 35 f2, really, i think it is similarly priced,

and will work on my film bodies, too.

jamesw wrote:id prefer the 35 f2, really, i think it is similarly priced,

$373 from Poon via the forum.

wider wrote:any way of knowing how this lens would compare to the nikkor 35mm F2?

I had both a little while ago when I had Yi-P's, unfortunately I got too busy and never got a chance to test them optically side-by-side. I suspect there's not going to be a helluva lot in it at the same aperture, by f/2 the Sigma is very good. In terms of AF, on the D200 the Sigma focusses slightly faster, but there's not as much in it as you might think. If you want to use the lens on a film camera then there's only one option.