How I (Finally) Chose the Fuji X-E1

The snake which cannot cast its skin has to die. As well the minds which are prevented from changing their opinions; they cease to be mind. –Friedrich Nietzsche

X-E1 + XF14mmF28 R
ISO 200 14mm ƒ/8.0 1/640s
If you have followed me online, then, you probably witnessed my indecisive behavior regarding photographic equipment. I have switched, swapped, paired, replaced and revisited my imaging toolkit at least twelve times. That is an under-estimate. I have dropped systems only to migrate right back to the same one months later—repeatedly. It got a little crazy. It also meant I was exposed to many approaches to the modern camera experience. I was able to form opinions on many aspects of it with a great deal of freedom. I did try renting and I found that, without the implied sense of ownership from actually purchasing a product, I did not experience the camera in the same way. There was no personal bond to the tool and without that investment, I frequently overlooked important aspects of the devices. This cycle only began one full year into my devotion to the practice of photography. For the first year, I used just one camera. For the following two years I played musical camera… chairs. That game is finally over.

Not coincidentally, I had experienced a similar situation several years prior to getting into photography. I was really interested in smart phones before most anyone in the mass market knew they existed. I would frequently buy them via gray market sources, use them, experience them, learn how terrible they were in various ways, then resell them to fund the next one. I mentally cataloged all of the various features and behaviors that I appreciated and those that I hated. There were many aspects that lived in the middle ground where I might have an opinion, but, not one strong enough to be considered a showstopper or a must have thing. This process repeated until Apple announced the iPhone. I thought it was ridiculous. It wasn’t even really a smartphone. It did not allow you to install apps, after all. However, most smart phones at the time were so poorly supported by third parties that they may as well not have had apps as well. I realized the most important aspects of my smart phone experience were being provided by Apple itself and by that virtue I knew they would be good user experiences far exceeding the garbage presented by companies like Nokia and Samsung at the time. So I switched. I have not had the slightest inclination to switch phone platforms since then.

So we’ve established that I do this… indecisive shuffling and then eventually find a settling point after I’ve had enough experience. I can’t guarantee I will never switch camera systems again, but, it will only happen if something new and unpredictable arrives, and it will not be without great deliberation as I am, frankly, sick and tired of the swap game. I lose time, money, and sleep each time I make one of these switches. I can’t afford to keep all of the cameras. I have to sell all of the gear to fund the next kit. The one and only product launch that will have me considering a switch again will be a full frame rangefinder style mirrorless camera with pro controls and conception—and not Leica. Since that isn’t likely to occur any time soon, I am not terribly worried about it. Furthermore, I won’t switch to an immature system. If there is a compelling offering, I will still be waiting for the necessary lenses to be produced.

X-E1 + XF60mmF24 R Macro
ISO 400 60mm ƒ/2.4 1/180s

At long last, I have made my decision. I’ve finally settled—and let us be clear that it is indeed settling, no matter how satisfied I am—on Fujifilm X series interchangeable lens cameras hereon referred to as the “XF” system. Some of you have questioned my decision. I have been fairly critical of the system until recently. Most of my criticisms are still completely valid and I stand by them. However, there was only one criticism which was a deal breaker. There was simply no acceptable RAW processing workflow for the system. The support for X-Trans sensor derived images was so poor in all third party software packages—that I could stand to use—that I simply couldn’t consider the camera system for practical use. That has changed since Lightroom 4.4 revised and improved the X-Trans support provided by Adobe. It’s not perfect, but, I can work with it.

The interesting thing about both of these situations, my long decisions on smart phones and cameras, is that, when I finally do make the final decision, it becomes a very different decision than I had been trying to make all along. Instead of discovering the option that gives me the least problems, I have found—in both cases—the option that gives me the most points of satisfaction in one package. I could iterate many individual items with which I am discontent. That isn’t the point now. Especially with this system, I have already done so previously. Every camera system I have used has had issues—major issues—of one kind or another. Instead of talking about that, I’ll tell you what, in aggregate, made this the camera system for me. Unless specifically claimed, I do not mean to imply that this is the only camera system that provides the features, attributes or capabilities I will now explain.

X-E1 + XF60mmF24 R Macro
ISO 800 60mm ƒ/3.6 1/90s

It’s small. Small enough, anyway. Even the portly X-Pro1 is smaller than any DSLR. I have chosen the X-E1, even smaller than the X-Pro1, but, will not rule out a second body down the road and may choose for it to be the successor to the X-Pro1. The size issue is something I’ve wrestled with. Miniaturization is something I have always been fascinated by. Ever since the days of the Nintendo Game Boy, I have fallen in love with devices that push the envelope on size. With cameras, it’s the same sort of thing. The main difference here is that the camera doesn’t have to be the smallest possible. It just had to be small enough. Small enough to fit into my real normal human programmer’s day-to-day backpack. Small enough to not accidentally murder small children if I was to turn abruptly while wearing it around my neck. Small enough that the weight was not noticeable on long hikes or walks. Small enough that it doesn’t reflect a design that was optimal ten years ago and beyond. But, large enough to hold and handle comfortably. The X-E1 is ideally sized.

High quality lenses are produced by the company that produces the cameras. I don’t expect every single lens produced by Fuji for the XF system to be flawless. Already, they have produced one lens that I find undesirable (the XF18mmF2 R). But, that means they have a far better track record—so far—than any other small camera system producer that I have considered. Four out of five lenses are impressively specified. The primes are all fast, sharp, well constructed and small. The “kit” lens defies that very moniker offering a brighter aperture than every other competitor in every class of interchangeable lens camera and, more importantly, an aperture range and performance level that allows me to consider it a first class lens in my set rather than just something I’d fall back on if needed. I actually like using the lens. But, the most important thing is that Fuji is making these lenses with an obvious ear to the desires of photographers. For the first time, a complete APS-C system is being produced in a way that shows the manufacturer thinks the customers care about photography in a serious way and they are doing it without the gimmick of Carl Zeiss or Leica signing off on lens designs. The results are a spectacular value offering in lenses not often found in any class of camera made today.

Electronic viewfinders are prevalent. I came to love the EVF when shooting the Sony NEX-7. An add-on is not acceptable. Fortunately, Fuji has produced three series of cameras where the EVF is a given, built-in, and of acceptable quality. It has room for improvement, but, it does the job. I want an eye level viewfinder and I prefer electronic.

X-E1 + XF14mmF28 R
ISO 800 14mm ƒ/2.8 1/110s

Dedicated EV compensation control. There isn’t much to say about this except that digital camera exposure control is incomplete with the EV compensation concept. Again, there is room for improvement on exactly how this plays into the overall function of the camera, specifically regarding the way AE-L works, but, it is there. It’s a hard dial and it’s in the perfect spot. Plus, it’s an absolute control making its current setting extremely visible at a glance with or without the power on.

A physical user interface that reflects the dedicated purpose of the product. This will require some explanation. I am a huge fan of the user interface concept introduced by Apple’s iPhone. In a nutshell, the concept is that the device fades into obscurity as much as is physically possible. The extreme minimalism of the physical device is not a mere aesthetic choice. It serves an extremely important purpose. It allows the device to become the software that is currently in use. You aren’t merely using a calendar on a phone, your phone has become a calendar. This makes so much sense for a device designed from the very beginning to be a chameleon of sorts, to become what is needed, a digital changeling. A camera is not such a device.

A camera serves one purpose: capturing images. Maybe you’re capturing moving images, but, it’s still the same overall concept. Let’s be clear right now that Fuji has not optimized anything for the sake of video. It’s tacked on and I have no concern about it. In my eyes, this is a still photography machine and I believe everything about it proves that Fuji designers feel the same way. So the crux of this point is that Fuji has identified the—obvious—purpose of the device and produced a user interface optimized for that purpose. The best counterexample is Sony NEX system cameras which have almost no dedicated control whatsoever. On my X-E1, without even powering on the device, I can select shutter speed, EV compensation, and aperture values (on lenses without variable aperture). The most important settings are immediately available and visible at all times. Even on variable aperture lenses, I still have the dedicated physical control to adjust it.

X-E1 + XF18-55mmF2.8-4 R LM OIS
ISO 800 26.5mm ƒ/5.6 1/2500s

Community support. When the greater photography community adores or respects a product, it is far more likely to produce accessories and software to support it. It seems small, but, RAW processing, customized presets for Lightroom from VSCO, form fitting L-Plates from Really Right Stuff and other such examples are exactly the kind of things I’m talking about. I find my experience with a camera to be more enjoyable when such products exist in support of it.

While zoomed in on an image in review, it is possible to navigate to adjacent images. Even better, the control to perform such navigation works whether or not the view is zoomed in. This is one of those features you truly only miss once it’s gone. It seems so small, but, in practice, it is huge. It saves so much time and serves an important purpose of helping me quickly review acquisition success in the field.

It has an ISO standard hot shoe. Because adapters are annoying to use. Even though this standard is old and superior alternatives have been demonstrated, it’s the thing that is supported. It’s the thing that works with my cheap Chinese triggers and flashes. And since it’s not trying to be too many interfaces at once, the compatibility is greater. The fit is more reliable.

X-E1 + XF35mmF14 R
ISO 200 35mm ƒ/1.4 1/220s

It has a built-in pop-up flash. A minor feature, but, there are times when I simply do not care about anything but getting a clear picture and a built-in flash is ideal for that. It’s also quite usable for fill on bright days when you handle it properly. In reality, it’s more a reflection on alternative products that I am even mentioning this here.

Wired electronic shutter release. Not only that, but, multiple options for remote shutter releases. I can use the Fuji proprietary USB style connector, the Canon style sub-mini connector, or a classic screw-in mechanical release. I really missed the ability to connect a programmable timed shutter release to my camera when shooting with Sony NEX. It’s so useful for long exposures, time lapse, or simply working on a tripod. This is another item that serves more to reflect poorly on alternatives. It shows that they don’t take the photographer who buys their products seriously. Fuji has produced complete cameras in the XF system, not some kind of point and shoot interchangeable lens hybrid.

Easily adjustable autofocus area size. What I mean by this, for those that don’t know what I’m talking about, is the ability to adjust the area in which the camera will check for the necessary contrast levels to decide if the image is in focus. On most cameras, the size of this rectangle is fixed. It is relevant due to the nature of contrast detect AF. The camera will be satisfied if any significant portion of the image in the rectangle is high contrast and thus sharp. Depending on the lens, this can lead to significant inaccuracy. Conversely, depending on the subject, one may need a larger area to see the contrast. In the X-E1, I can choose from five sizes with the simple turn of a dial in AF selection point mode.

X-E1 + XF35mmF14 R
ISO 200 35mm ƒ/1.4 1/300s

In-camera RAW processing. Because, the exposure is based on the interpretation of the scene made by the camera. Sometimes, the very best processing result comes from the camera itself because of this fact. But, maybe you didn’t like the particular taste settings you had chosen at the time of exposure. It’s so nice to be able to see what else the camera may have done and then actually save those results for use right on the camera. Even better, if you’re using something like an Eye-Fi card, you can get high quality adjusted results, including dynamic range recovery and film simulation changes done with the best possible results before sending the image off to your tablet or phone for immediate sharing. I also use this feature when setting up shots to see what kind of results I can achieve from a scene without having to guess at what kind of post processing success I may have from the typically generic exposure I would normally make.

The Q menu. The most important settings all on a grid with quick adjustments made by the rear dial. What’s even better is the large number of user presets you can define and quickly access to switch all of these settings at once. The existence of this menu almost makes the programmable Fn button unnecessary. Almost.

A usable menu system. Sure, it’s typically laid out like many DSLR, but, that’s the point. Some compact system camera designers approached this aspect like they had never used a camera before. So it’s refreshing, and speeds the adjustment of important settings when they are not available via the Q menu.

X-E1 + XF60mmF24 R Macro
ISO 200 60mm ƒ/2.8 1/640s

More than usable—impressive JPEG results. The JPEGs produced by this camera are top notch. They continue to best the external RAW processors for pure detail rendering from the X-Trans RAW images, and when you appropriately apply the film simulation modes, the results are stunning. I have never used a camera where I have had so much satisfaction from the JPEGs it produces. It is already beginning to change the way I go about making and processing images in some circumstances.

Unmatched (in its sensor class) low light results. There is a downside to this, which is the base ISO is a high 200. However, I would rather expect to stick an ND filter on in the rare cases where I need slower shutter speeds than give up the one stop advantage this camera holds over the other APS-C compact cameras. It’s simply a matter of taking in more light on the sensor. There is no special magic here. The sensor is the same 16mp sensor Sony sticks in several of its own cameras. But, the low pass filters eat up a lot of light. Getting rid of them entirely (rather than replacing them with a benign construct as is done on some cameras for the sake of manufacturing tolerances) frees up a large amount of light and that is why the base ISO is 200 and the performance at 6400 is on par with 3200 on the competition. This is why it really does compare to full frame cameras at higher ISO shooting. Same exposure times, similar noise levels. Just avoid 100 ISO since it’s faked in JPEG and results in the loss of some dynamic range.

X-E1 + XF18-55mmF2.8-4 R LM OIS
ISO 200 55mm ƒ/5.6 1/100s

That about sums up the main points that have led me to finally decide on this camera system. With all of these points, there is a common undercurrent that isn’t always mentioned. The critical difference between what I’ve seen and experienced with the XF system versus other competing similar systems is really important: Fuji appears to have a design and development creed that has led to these attributes and features. It does not seem to be a mere trend that will change entirely in another round of updates. That’s fairly key in my thinking.

Now, if you made it this far, consider me impressed. I would like to reiterate here that I don’t consider this to be any kind of condemnation of any other camera system. You will spend a large amount of time if you were to seek out a camera system that can not produce excellent images when applied with the appropriate level of knowledge and skill with that system. This is merely the system that hits the most key points of value for me personally. I hope that Fuji continues to advance the XF system in the same direction. I look forward to hybrid AF in future XF bodies and more wonderful lenses such as the upcoming XF 55-200mm ƒ/3.5-4.8, the XF 23mm ƒ/1.4 and the XF 56mm ƒ/1.2(!) coming over the course of this year.

Most importantly, this decision frees up my mind to simply enjoy photography again without always wondering if I’m really happy with the tools I’m using to do so. I have a little bit of a Merkin Muffley feeling going on. So, now you know how I learned to stop worrying and love the camera I picked.

Incidentally, all of the images in this post were JPEGs produced by the camera. The upload to Blogger may have had some impact on their appearance, but, that is always the case.

Resolution of X-Trans Derived Images

So http://www.dpreview.com/ updated their lab samples for the Fuji X-trans camera based reviews. The interesting thing I found was their explanation about why you can’t compare images from these cameras directly with others:

Using our standard processing, with Adobe Camera Raw’s noise reduction set to a minimum, the X-E1’s images look rather different to those from Bayer sensor cameras, and specifically show much lower chroma noise. This means that direct comparisons have to be treated with caution; in effect the demosaicing required by the X-Trans CMOS sensor includes a degree of chroma NR.
Which, of course, makes perfect sense. The “semi-random” pattern in the Fuji X-trans would imply a need to apply an algorithm similar to noise reduction (if not identical) to smooth out colors properly. But that means that in order to compensate for this semi-random pattern—the pattern that’s used to allow the elimination of the anti-aliasing filter—detail-crushing noise reduction algorithms are applied. The result based on my own A) browsing of many, many, online samples, B) my own experiments with this camera and C) the lab samples on DPReview is that the images out of these cameras are less sharp, to a noticeable degree, when RAW converted outside the camera. The camera’s JPEG engine apparently applies a large amount of sharpening to compensate (along with harsh color and contrasts but that’s appealing to some people, Canon does the same thing to a lesser degree).

Ultimately, what this means is simple: The X-trans sensor does not produce as sharp of images as normal Bayer array sensors even with (weak) AA filters in place. This isn’t that big of a deal, it just means your effective resolution after processing is lowered, that you will probably want to reduce the estimated acceptable output size (i.e. if you thought 16mp was good for a 16x20 print, you might want to drop to 12x18 for X Pro 1/X-E1 cameras). And, of course, it is ultimately not meaningful for web-sized images.

It does make me wonder why they did not choose a 24mp base sensor as this would definitely compensate for the loss of overall resolution, and as Sony has shown, produces less total noise when normalized to the same typical print/output sizes.

It also helps explain why I spent 4 hours on Flickr never finding any sharp full sized images from these cameras. They just can’t produce them. The sharpening artifacts expose the lack of actual sharpness and it’s not the lenses (as far as anyone can tell), it’s this larger sensor pattern which makes perfect sense once you think about it a little.

So there you go. Shoot with the X-Trans sensors, they do offer slightly increased sensitivities at the same noise levels and reduced moiré without an anti-aliasing filter, but remember to compensate for this demosaicing when deciding on final output or sharpening when pushing for larger prints than the actual resolution would support and you’ll get the best results. I would say it’s more appropriate to think of these cameras as more like 12-14mp (it will depend on the colors in the subject matter) than 16mp.

 One last comparison I would now like to make, but, can’t as I no longer have an X-trans camera in hand is the black and white processing in-camera. I wonder if the camera takes advantage of the RAW data to demosaic the image with less loss of detail when shooting B&W. It’s possible, especially in the large blocks of green. There are many 2x2 blocks of all green pixels which is probably a big contributor to detail loss in color demosaicing. Anyway, if I ever have another one of these cameras to play with then I’ll give this comparison a try.

Incognito Flash Lamps

Faced with another birthday party at Chuck E Cheese, a place my daughter loves but low ISO’s do not, I decided to get creative. I shot this album of images with a set of three Yongnuo YN-560 and YN-560 II’s with a diffuser cap/”omni bounce” inside of small lampshades generally placed along the table (and that can be seen in a few of the shots) or moved as needed for certain phases of the party.



I wanted to go for a look like dinner around a table with candles/lamps sort of low key, pleasant ambiance kind of thing. I also wanted to shoot at lower ISOs to get some real nice images of my kid as keepsakes. I don’t know if something like this would be viable/useful outside of a family event where I don’t care that I can see the bottoms of the lamps are actually flash bodies, but, I had thought that perhaps I could push the idea further in the future and hide the flashes in something that actually looks like a lamp. This was a prototype test run where at least I cared to get some decent shots.



Anyway, the flashes were all set at 1/64th power, zoomed out to 24mm, diffuser down, gelled 1/4 CTO, with Meike omnibounce-alike cap inside simple small white lampshades that I bought at Wal-mart for $3.50 each. The bounce caps (for bare-bulb-like effect) cost $5 each so the modifier cost was very low per flash. Camera was a Nikon D800 + Sigma 35mm ƒ/1.4 set to 100 ISO most of the time, occasionally up to 200 ISO, 1/60-1/100s shutter, f/1.4-2 all varied depending on my whim. Just one image from this album is not lit with the lights, it’ll probably be obvious which one.



Keep in mind that this was merely my own kid’s B-day party and not some event I shot for pay. I figured it might be interesting to the strobists anyway due to the unusual approach I took to dealing with a low/mixed light setting where the ceilings were too high and unpredictably colored to bounce (and I don’t really like the eye-shadow effect of bounced flash anyway.)

Review: Sigma 30mm F2.8 EX DN (NEX)

Sigma 30mm F2.8 EX DN (for NEX)

Let’s jump to the conclusion first: This lens is a very good buy at $200. This lens can not replace the Sony E 24mm ƒ/1.8 ZA, but, comes very close to its performance in many ways. It even bests it in size and sharpness.

The Details

I was able to get out and shoot a number of comparisons between the two lenses. I was motivated to buy and compare the 30mm to the 24mm because of some lab results from lensrentals.com. Essentially, they found the Sigma to be very sharp, even wide open. But, let’s start there. “Wide open” is relative. For a prime lens, ƒ/2.8 is not particularly large of an aperture. It’s about a stop larger than the kit lens at the same focal length. That can be the difference between 1600 or 800 ISO. It can be meaningful. It won’t, however, give you eye-grabbingly shallow depth of field for normally distant subjects.

Sharpness

It’s very sharp, especially at ƒ/5.6. Both lenses peak at ƒ/5.6. The Sigma’s sharpness is dulled somewhat by less than excellent contrast. It’s not bad, by any means, but it’s no Zeiss. It also doesn’t handle bright light sources nearly as well as the Zeiss, likely due to differences in coatings. In the dark, lights such as headlamps on cars generate huge halos and they are quite unattractive. However, in more normal lighting scenarios, you won’t notice these issues. I noticed it mostly on buildings with the evening sun shining bright on the sides. The Zeiss held the details far better in those areas than the Sigma. But make no mistake, under slightly more controlled lighting, the Sigma is definitely as sharp or sharper than the Zeiss at normal to long distances. The Zeiss does better close up, which brings me to…

Close-ups 

Macro. Reproduction ratio. The Zeiss has about double the reproduction ratio as the Sigma. There is absolutely no contest here. I can shove the Zeiss several inches away from the face of a subject and show you the bacteria crawling around in the oil in the pores of their skin. (Okay, maybe that’s a slight exaggeration but it’s amazing. The Zeiss is very well corrected for close focus.) Even though the Sigma is a longer focal length, I can not fill the frame with as small of things. In fact, the “macro” capability of the Sigma isn’t even worth mentioning. It has nothing even close to macro capability. The Zeiss, with its sharp close range correction coupled with the 24mp sensor of the NEX-7 means I can shoot very close up on a whim, crop it, and you wouldn’t even know I didn’t have a macro lens with me. Versatility is where the Zeiss comes out clearly ahead.

Bokeh

The Zeiss has better bokeh in most every situation. Not by a huge margin, most of the time. Sometimes the Sigma has this split bokeh appearance, which has some Japanese curse name because it’s notably ugly. It doesn’t always happen. Bokeh discs from bright lights are much worse on the Sigma than the Zeiss. They look like super zoom bokeh discs on the Sigma. They look like prime lens discs on the Zeiss.

In fact, that is a good summation of the Sigma, it performs like a great ƒ/2.8 zoom except it doesn’t zoom.

Autofocus

The Sigma focuses a little more slowly. I suspect this is due to its odd design. It seems to use magnets for focus, or the gearing is extremely loose without power because the entire focusing assembly slides freely when the lens is off the camera or the camera is off. A magnetically controlled focus assembly would be a cool way to keep size down.

Size 

The Sigma is smaller, significantly. However, it’s no pancake. It sticks out beyond the hand grip on the NEX-7. It is not flared towards the end like some pictures make it look, it’s a straight tube whose diameter is about half a millimeter less than the widest part of the metal lens mount on the NEX-7. Oh and the Sigma has a metal mount, not cheap plastic like the low end Sony alpha lenses.

Manual focus

As with all native E mount lenses, it focuses by wire. This is fine, once you get used to it. The faster you turn the ring, the fast the focus changes with a curved acceleration rate, which is nice once you get the feel for the rate. Specifically with the Sigma, however, there is a small problem. This is where the cheapness shows most clearly. If you apply even a small amount of pressure to the ring, which you are lightly to do out of habit of holding your camera steady, you will deform the ring slightly into the lens body and “brake” the ring against the internals of the lens. When this happens, it is difficult or impossible to turn the ring. You must hold the ring lightly and then it turns easily. This is something you can deal with consciously, but, may bite you in a stressful shooting moment.

Accessories

Sigma thought it necessary to provide a thickly padded zipper case for the lens. However, they thought it unnecessary to provide any hood of any kind. The lens element is almost flush with the lens front. It’s small and slightly bulbous exactly like the Sony E 16mm ƒ/2.8. Both lenses are quite vulnerable to a scrape on the lens. The Sigma, however, seems fairly resistant to flare. I had no issues with flare and could not force it to occur when I tried. Perhaps on a day with fewer clouds and earlier when the sun is brighter I could get some blobs. I wouldn’t worry about that. I would worry a little about protecting the front element. But here’s the rub, if you buy and attach a filter for protection, the filter will undoubtedly flare like the cheap garbage most filters are made out of. Since this lens is so cheap and you’ll probably shoot at ƒ/2.8 - ƒ/4 99% of the time, I wouldn’t put anything on it. Just accept you might get a scratch or two on the front of your ridiculously cheap lens. No big deal. Finally, unlike Tokina lenses, Sigma’s lens caps both front and rear work well and fit correctly.

Build

As mentioned, the focus ring has a flaw if squeezed. So don’t squeeze it. The mounting ring is metal, not cheap plastic. The rest of the lens is plastic. It doesn’t look expensive but it doesn’t look bad. It looks better than Sony’s cheap alpha lenses. Focus is internal, nothing spins or moves externally when using the lens. There is some noise in the lens even in manual focus. I suspect this is the focus motor maintaining the position of the focus group and/or aperture. I also suspect this is done electromagnetically (which would explain the nature of the noise. It sounds like a tiny speaker picking up interference and a speaker is controlled by magnets, so….)

Verdict 

This is pretty simple. Do you need a sharp lens for NEX-7, but, you can’t afford the Sony E 24mm ƒ/1.8 ZA? Buy this. Do you really like the field of view this lens offers? Buy this. The field of view of the 24 vs. the 30 is significantly different. Remember, the relationship between focal length and field of view is non-linear. The shorter the focal length, the bigger the angle difference for every millimeter. The difference between 24 and 30 is approximately 10 degrees. Personally, I find the 24 to be far more versatile. The 30 is definitely not “portrait” length so standing slightly closer to the subject or cropping gives the same angle of view. The 24 can be safely used at ƒ/2.2 for great sharpness to compensate in DOF terms. The 30 does not offer much that the 24 does not offer and as such is not a replacement, for any price comparison. If you can swing the $1100 USD for the 24mm, buy that. The Sigma 30mm is not smaller enough to consider it as a compact alternative.

At the end of the day, the Sigma 30mm F2.8 EX DN is a great lens, irrespective of price. It is the third best lens for the NEX system right now, in my opinion (the best is the 24mm, the second is the 50mm ƒ/1.8 OSS). It is the sharpest, in controlled lighting situations, if only by a tiny margin. It is lighter and smaller than the other two. It is one of only three E mount lenses that won’t make your NEX-7 sensor look like a snob. But, be warned, it’s a Sigma lens and I got a good copy. My copy is pretty much perfectly centered. I won the lottery. Almost every Sigma product is riddled with quality control problems. If you buy this lens and it isn’t as good as I say, return it and get a different copy. Do this up to 5 times. Yes, seriously, 5 times. Sorry, that’s the price to pay to get the price you pay for this lens.

Eventually I will post some images I made with this lens. You can find many examples around the web for doing your own pixel peeping comparisons, but, suffice it to say, if you have not had 5000+ exposures experience with the E 24mm, it will be very hard to make a reasonable comparison.

But hey, it’s $200 USD. (Well, $220 lately) so you won’t be taking much of a risk in buying this lens.

Recommendation

Buy this lens if you don’t have or plan to buy the E 24mm ƒ/1.8 ZA.

Unexpected Self-discovery

Until recently, all of the cameras I have used that had eye level viewfinders had those viewfinders located on the optical axis. In other words, they were in line with the lens and generally in a middle area of the camera body.

Now, I have the NEX-7 which has the viewfinder in the location more commonly associated with rangefinder cameras, on the left upper corner. So, I have been experimenting with different methods of looking through the viewfinder. I’ve discovered something surprising.

When looking through the viewfinder on a regular body, whether using my left or right eye, my alternate eye is obstructed by the camera body. Until recently, I had never given it any thought. However, using the rangefinder style viewfinder led me to try using my right eye more often, which is not the eye I most commonly used with past viewfinders and it has led to an interesting discovery.

Apparently, until now, I have not been closing my alternate eye. In fact, doing so is so foreign that I am having difficulty keeping my left eye closed when using my right eye in the viewfinder. I guess I will have to exercise this combination of open and closed eyes. Unlike shooting in a real rangefinder, one can not keep both eyes open using a rangefinder-style electronic viewfinder. It is like using a telescope with only one of your eyes while keeping both open.

Of course, I can use my left eye in the viewfinder and the camera blocks my right eye, but, that just doesn’t seem right for this rangefinder style of viewfinder.

I found this discovery surprising and amusing. It’s fascinating how an action can become so habitual that you lose awareness of precisely how you perform it.

Failure



It slips.
Falling…

Falling…


falling…



It seems




to fall forever, then

It bounces. Twice.
Into the wall. Failure.
Glass shatters, sprays.
Fragments
of light
and teeth fly
away.

Escape.

Fragments
Spread out.
Signify loss

Of form.

Of life.


Slipping
into
the cracks.
Pieces
of your
old life
diminished and then



abandoned there.


Forgotten.


No one
even
knows who
you were.

Neither
do
you.

Failure.
The end.

Begin
to gain
your sight.
You see a path.
Despite
failure
you have
survived.

Such short sighted thoughts
that is what led you here.
To think this is the end.
To forget the very
essence of living.
Every end is a beginning.

Hopeless-
ness is the canvas
upon which
the most
beautiful
oils are
layered.
Scraped.
Tortured
and eventually…

beloved.

Alone at Sunset



outside city limits
asphalt becomes gravel
traffic signals blinking
bovine tails are swinging

beyond humble homesteads
sunlight begins fading
silence overwhelms me
grasses swaying gently

eagles flying nearby
floating over rivers
spying tiny rodents
effortlessly hunting

sparrows in the bushes
shaking barren branches
swiftly gathers supplies
sunset’s cold approaching

water bubbling softly
flowing under bridges
shedding icy coating
harbors unseen nature

distant skyline’s glowing
imparts peaceful solace
showers golden half-light
precedes violet twilight

and here I find myself
watching with true wonder
wishing I could loiter
a part of this forever