Sigma 30mm or 35mm 1.4?

Genoma

Genoma

Genoma

Associate
Joined
5 Mar 2006
Posts
2,347
Location
Shropshire
I've currently got:

Canon EF-S 10-22 for UWA
Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 general / walkabout use
Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM cheap tele
Nifty Fifty

Considering the Sigma 30mm 1.4 as a nice good prime for low light, parties and portraits. The 35mm is almost twice the price and I think I would be happier with 30mm on a crop.

Any thoughts between these two - don't really know much about either.
 
The difference in the lenses is night and day really.

The 30mm is just a rebadged version of the old 30mm 1.4. Good lens, sharp in the centre, dismal in the corners and borders as to be expected.

The 35mm 1.4 is arguably one of the best modern lenses around, but it's big heavy and expensive (compared to the 30mm). Of course it covers the full 35mm frame, but it's probably not something you want to carry about at parties.
 
If you own a 50mm then I would look wider than 35mm, which makes the 30mm slightly more interesting but as enlishpremier said, it is actually a pretty bad lens if you care about anything away form the center, and the bokeh is very nervous.

The Canon 28mm f1.8 USM Lens might be worth a shout but it doesn't seem to get much praise.
 
Personally on a crop body I would get a nikon 35 1.8g

It's a lot cheaper, provides excellent optics and is very light, the downside is the build quality isn't great
 
I have a sigma 24 1.8 and while the AF isn't great (think canon/nikon standard AF, 50 or 85 1.8) the lens is extremely sharp for the money and produces lovely bokeh. Think i paid around £120 for mine about 7 years ago, stonking lens for the money tbh!
 
JBuk said:
Personally on a crop body I would get a nikon 35 1.8g

It's a lot cheaper, provides excellent optics and is very light, the downside is the build quality isn't great
Click to expand...

The other downside is it Nikon only and the OP has a canon...
 
If you have the cash and don't mind the size go with the 35mm art, the 30mm is nowhere near as good but a great lens on a crop it is also a lot smaller and lighter!

Left field option the old school canon 35mm f2 it is very sharp across the frame focuses very close and is cheap as chips the af is a bit noisy but i can live with it!

Shame canon has never made a crop only 30/35mm to compete with nikons offering!
 
^^^ the Nikon 35mm is exceedingly popular on Nikon, to the exten they decided to make a FF version as well.
 
Thanks guys, sounds like the 30 is out then. Time to save up for a 35. Or maybe go completely different with a 100 macro. Is IS worth the premium on the 100 macro?
 
Genoma said:
Thanks guys, sounds like the 30 is out then. Time to save up for a 35. Or maybe go completely different with a 100 macro. Is IS worth the premium on the 100 macro?
Click to expand...
The 35A regularly pops up on TP used for between £400 and £450, keep an eye out for a mint copy.

The 100 L doesn't bring much of anything image quality wise, it's mainly the IS, weather sealing, handling and the red ring.
 
Genoma said:
Thanks guys, sounds like the 30 is out then. Time to save up for a 35. Or maybe go completely different with a 100 macro. Is IS worth the premium on the 100 macro?
Click to expand...

Strange jump to a 100mm macro it's a bit of a different beast! One thing I have learnt (the hard way) over the years is to only buy gear you actually need and will use! A 100mm macro maybe a fantastic piece of glass but if it never/rarely comes out of the bag it wasn't money well spent! Your better off concentrating all your funds into lenses you will use and keeping your bag light!

Now if only I would take that advice and replace my 35mm f2 which I use all the time with something better!
 
a1ex2001 said:
Strange jump to a 100mm macro it's a bit of a different beast! One thing I have learnt (the hard way) over the years is to only buy gear you actually need and will use! A 100mm macro maybe a fantastic piece of glass but if it never/rarely comes out of the bag it wasn't money well spent! Your better off concentrating all your funds into lenses you will use and keeping your bag light!

Now if only I would take that advice and replace my 35mm f2 which I use all the time with something better!
Click to expand...

All true. I pretty much use the 3 lenses above equally in different circumstances, lightroom shots counts with each one seems to be pretty much consistent.

It sounds a bit like a scattered consideration (and In a way I'm testing my reasoning and just gathering info) but I'm just considering what would complement the above lens set best.

On one hand it would have been handy to have a fast prime for portraits, low light and for some nice still life bokeh shots. On another hand my wife loves animals, and the macro would have been used if it was in the bag for insects now and again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom