Shield wrote:
I don't buy lenses for how they look. Accurate autofocus is very important though.
I may not own Sigma, but I used both 50mm & 85mm and both AF with no front nor back focus and sharp even on my beloved 5Dc. I have no problem with Sigma, ops fingers crossed!
Dudewithoutape wrote:
If you're doing this in order to purchase the lens for yourself, I'd like to ask what you shoot most and your intentions for the lens, and budget. I think they all have their place.
Personally, for me, Sigma!
I mostly shoot street, travel photography. No sports no wildlife.
I am indeed looking at buying a 35 prime to compliment my zooms (16-35 & 24-105), for low light conditions and sometimes night and indoors photography.
Normally I would have jumped on the Sigma, but I think I might go for the 35 f/2 IS. IQ looks good, even if not quite as good as Sigma's, although the Canon seems to have better bokeh or at least oof highlights. I just love the thought of 4 stop IS for low light work in dark interiors of galleries etc, where no tripods are allowed. Also the size and weight are very nice. If I were going to be picky, I wish Canon had made it f/1.8, but 1/3 of a stop is barely going to be noticeable.
Given a choice - lenses sitting on a table choose one - I'd take the Canon f1.4 if only for a more reassuring build quality. It might be blind faith but I'd live with it.
Jan 16, 2013 at 08:46 PM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
Shield wrote:
One other thing about the Sigma I've noticed - I'm just not in love with the colors. Lots of pics I've taken just seem very dark to me; even with the vignetting compensation set to 200% in lightroom. I don't know what it is; we'll see if it's just my imagination when I test the 35L.
Every reviews that I have been reading that compared the colors, say the Sigma is the much better lens. It has less CA and better color correction.
diglloyd write a lot about it in his comparison between these two lenses
But it say a lot about how really good the Sigma lens is. It's a new lens that just came out. And have very few owners compared to the 35/1,4 L. Still a lot more people like it. It's the Canon forum with many people owning the 35/1,4...........and most people vote for the lens they own.
The Sigma is a great lens. And until Canon release a 35/1,4 II (maybe after that also) it will be the best 35mm with AF for Canon bodies.
Lasse Eriksson wrote:
But it say a lot about how really good the Sigma lens is. It's a new lens that just came out. And have very few owners compared to the 35/1,4 L. Still a lot more people like it. It's the Canon forum with many people owning the 35/1,4...........and most people vote for the lens they own.
The Sigma is a great lens. And until Canon release a 35/1,4 II (maybe after that also) it will be the best 35mm with AF for Canon bodies.
There is always new toy in store better than old one I am fine with my third copy of 35L and Canon in general.
I'd like to know from anyone that has the new 35 IS if they have had the chance to compare it to the Zeiss 35 f2. I have the Zeiss lens but I can see where the IS would be really helpful.
Lars Johnsson wrote:
Every reviews that I have been reading that compared the colors, say the Sigma is the much better lens. It has less CA and better color correction.
diglloyd write a lot about it in his comparison between these two lenses
I try to go by what I personally see after I've acquired an item; the "what others' say" is before I've purchased a product. It's just what I've noticed from my own shots with it and most others I see posted. Just looks heavily vignetted to me. Perhaps it's because people weren't shooting other models @ F/1.4 with this crazy sharpness?
Breitling65 wrote:
So, Canon lenses still winning over new Sig?
Never thought it was a race. Everyone needs to pick their own gear for their own reasons. The Sigma certainly has stirred the pot releasing a wonderful lens at a nice price. If it doesn't fit your style, use something else...but keep childish comments away from good discussions.
chez wrote:
Never thought it was a race. Everyone needs to pick their own gear for their own reasons. The Sigma certainly has stirred the pot releasing a wonderful lens at a nice price. If it doesn't fit your style, use something else...but keep childish comments away from good discussions.
I think it is still interesting to see that half the people on a Canon gearhead forum, where you would expect extremely strong brand loyalty, would pick the Siggie over the 2 Canon lenses.
I am not a huge Sigma fan, but I have to admit it speaks volume for Sigma.
chez wrote:
Never thought it was a race. Everyone needs to pick their own gear for their own reasons. The Sigma certainly has stirred the pot releasing a wonderful lens at a nice price. If it doesn't fit your style, use something else...but keep childish comments away from good discussions.
didierv wrote:
I think it is still interesting to see that half the people on a Canon gearhead forum, where you would expect extremely strong brand loyalty, would pick the Siggie over the 2 Canon lenses.
I am not a huge Sigma fan, but I have to admit it speaks volume for Sigma.
It is very understandable to me, every new toy (lens or body) causing total destruction of old Many expecting new 35LII and they are thinking that Canon is reading such posts and will respond soon. Sig lens is not as cheap to drop 35L so quick. 35L is a work horse for many good photographers who are laughing by reading such threads.
didierv wrote:
I think it is still interesting to see that half the people on a Canon gearhead forum, where you would expect extremely strong brand loyalty, would pick the Siggie over the 2 Canon lenses.
I am not a huge Sigma fan, but I have to admit it speaks volume for Sigma.
