Besides the wider aperture of the Sigma is there any reason to chose one of these lenses over the other.

I am wanting one for a 'normal' lens on a D1X.

...I would definitely go for the Nikon 35 f/2....I have one and it is excellent. I have read some "back focus/front focus" situations with the sigma...I like the idea of getting a lens, putting it on the camera, and everything works normally right off the bat.

I bought the 30mm f/1.4 for my D1x. Here are some sample shots:

All on D1x.

f/5.6:

My vote is for the 30 1.4. F1.4 vs 2 is one stop. I just got this lens today. I must say I am impressed. Heres a 100 percent crop at 1.4 out of camera jpeg from D300. I am a raw guy and forgot to switch to raw. But the Jpeg is good never the less.

I have both. The plan was to sell the 35/2 after getting the Sigma. As it turns out, the 35 resolves sharper images with more pleasing color. Aside from some occasional flare(I don't have a hood for it), it's the most impressive lens optically that I have. But sometimes there is just no substitute for a f/1.4 lens. My Sigma stays on the D1H. It is a great low light combo. If you need the wider aperature or you plan to use it on a D40/60, your choice is easy. You say you just want a normal lens on the D1x, I would go with the 35.(Though I still consider a 50 normal)

Don't overlook the Nikkor 35mm f/1.4, unless autofocus is critical.

~Ted

if you need sharp, get the 35, if you need the extra stop get the 30.

louis fusco wrote:
if you need sharp, get the 35, if you need the extra stop get the 30.

that is good to the point information!

Just got the 30. 1.4 Sigma today. Great lens. No time yet to do anything good. But here are a few test shots.

Please don't mob me for linking to "him"...


http://www.kenrockwell.com/sigma/30mm-f14.htm

..but I think this is quite useful. Personally I'd go for the Nikon.

Adam

I actually like reading his site!

AKHarvey wrote:
Please don't mob me for linking to "him"...


http://www.kenrockwell.com/sigma/30mm-f14.htm

..but I think this is quite useful. Personally I'd go for the Nikon.

Adam

I shot 80% of a wedding last night with my 35 and the shots came out great. I cannot wait till we get updated primes.

on which body?

Brandon Mizar wrote:
I shot 80% of a wedding last night with my 35 and the shots came out great. I cannot wait till we get updated primes.

So do I, but it can be dangerous to admit that around here

My vote is still for the Nikon. My SIgma was very jittery when focusing at distance (although admittedly it was a macro lens), it would hunt for ages before locking on.

I'm also sure flesh tones were a bit too yellow through it, never really tested it out though.

Also worth considering is that if you sell either the Nikon will recover a lot more of its original cost. I've sold Nikon lenses for 80% of the price I paid, Sigma were more like 50%.

Adam

Well thanks to everyone for thei replies, I will eventually get the Nikon, but it will have to wait a little bit now because I picked up a 17-55, the 35 will definatly make it into the bag as a walk around though.

I used the d3.

turnert wrote:
Don't overlook the Nikkor 35mm f/1.4, unless autofocus is critical.

~Ted

I second this