Upload & Sell: On
| p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Sigma 35 1.4: Anyone been using over the 35L? || |
Just wondering the user experience of those that have previously used the EF 35L and the new Sigma 35 1.4.
What do you like or dislike between the two? I'm looking to graduate from my Robocop sounding EF35 f2.
Robocop-sounding! ! that's just funny as he!!. I had the 35L when I owned all Canon equipment. It's a super-nice lens, gives beautifully warm colors, but as it is a 1998-era lens there are some advantages to newer optics. this would be *most likely* better sharpness from 1.4 - 2.8, better Coma and flare control, and everything else that all reviews claim as true. I've held the Sigma and it's a wonderful lens, but built differently....not to say better or worse. It's a little heavier but with a smaller filter. Thus, vignetting is worse.
My 35L had very, very fast and accurate AF, but my 5d2 didn't do me any favors in low light. You do know the 35L is mostly plastic on the exterior with lots of metal inside, right? The focus ring is just right, the lens balances better (on a FF body) than the Sigma in my opinion. It's a better lens than the Nikon 35/1.4G for sure, but optically a little behind the Sigma. For less than a $200 price difference, I'd go with the Canon 35L. It's legendary for a reason, and should hold up quite well. that's my final answer.