Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 24 Dec 2013 (Tuesday) 12:27
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Sigma 35 f1.4 or Canon 35 f2 IS

 
JeremyBlake
Senior Member
Avatar
531 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Columbus, OH, USA
     
Mar 08, 2014 09:37 |  #91

Sirrith wrote in post #16740393 (external link)
The Sigma is sharper than the Canon, it wasn't because of "his copy".

Yup, and it's not even close. I've seen comparisons people have done and it's not even remotely close.


flickr (external link) | 500px (external link) | Gear | Facebook (external link) | Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
turbo_911
Senior Member
491 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Oct 2008
Location: State College, PA
     
Mar 08, 2014 10:45 |  #92

The reason why I have hard time deciding on picking up Canon 35mm f/2 is because it's not f/1.4. If it was, I would of bought one already long time ago.
I am not sure if f/2 will be enough for me at 35mm.

As for Zeiss, it's a manual lens, I already have a manual lens. I kind of like AF lol.


Canon 6D | Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 | Canon 100mm f/2.8L IS |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dlee13
Goldmember
Avatar
4,244 posts
Gallery: 616 photos
Likes: 3893
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Sydney
     
Mar 09, 2014 23:58 |  #93

I just ordered myself a 35mm f2 IS :D another member for team Canon :P The availability of this lens is pretty bad, a few stores I checked don't stock it and can't get it in!


Sony Alpha A7III - Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 - Sony FE 90mm f/2.8 Macro
Sony FE 85mm f/1.8 - Canon EF 16-35mm f4L IS -
Canon EOS M5 - Canon EF-M 32mm f/1.4 - Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 - Canon EF 11-22mm f/4-5.6 STM

Blog (external link) | Flickr (external link) | 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Otohp
Senior Member
331 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Oregon, USA
     
Mar 10, 2014 09:33 |  #94

Dlee13 wrote in post #16747065 (external link)
I just ordered myself a 35mm f2 IS :D another member for team Canon :P The availability of this lens is pretty bad, a few stores I checked don't stock it and can't get it in!

I think you will really enjoy this lens- congrats!

Otohp.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dlee13
Goldmember
Avatar
4,244 posts
Gallery: 616 photos
Likes: 3893
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Sydney
     
Mar 10, 2014 09:54 |  #95

Otohp wrote in post #16747698 (external link)
I think you will really enjoy this lens- congrats!

Otohp.

Thanks :D I played around with my 17-40 the past few days at 35mm and shooting wide open just to get an exact idea of focal length, I'm real happy with how it looks so I know with the 35 IS I'm going to be in love!!!


Sony Alpha A7III - Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 - Sony FE 90mm f/2.8 Macro
Sony FE 85mm f/1.8 - Canon EF 16-35mm f4L IS -
Canon EOS M5 - Canon EF-M 32mm f/1.4 - Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 - Canon EF 11-22mm f/4-5.6 STM

Blog (external link) | Flickr (external link) | 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dave_bass5
Goldmember
Avatar
4,303 posts
Gallery: 34 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 197
Joined Apr 2005
Location: London, centre of the universe
     
Mar 10, 2014 09:57 |  #96

Dlee13 wrote in post #16747754 (external link)
I know with the 35 IS I'm going to be in love!!!

As most of us are :-)

Congrats and welcome to the club.


Dave.
Gallery@http://www.flickr.com/​photos/davebass5/ (external link)
Canon 5DMKIV | Canon EOS-M50 | Canon 24-70 f/2.8L MKII | 70-300L | 135L f/2.0 | EF-S 10-18 | 40 f/2.8 STM | 35mm f/2 IS | Canon S110 | Fuji F31FD | Canon 580EXII, 270EXII | Yongnuo YN-622C Triggers.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Aressem
Goldmember
Avatar
4,364 posts
Gallery: 39 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 511
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Mar 10, 2014 10:02 |  #97

Sirrith wrote in post #16552133 (external link)
If money is an issue or you want IS, then get the Canon. If you want f1.4, nicer build, and the best IQ, get the Sigma.

THIS. Hit the nail on the head. The Sigma is the better lens, absolutely no doubt about it. You just have to decide whether or not you want to spend the bucks. I own it and have played with a friend's Canon f/2 IS. The Sigma is a beast wide open. Build construction is bullet proof (feels like a Zeiss) and the IQ just doesn't get any better than this. This really is no contest. You either want to spend the money or you don't :)


Ryan Mackay WEBSITE (external link) | FACEBOOK (external link) | GEAR LIST | Buy & Sell Feedback: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
WhyFi
Goldmember
Avatar
2,766 posts
Gallery: 237 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 804
Joined Apr 2008
Location: I got a castle in Brooklyn, that's where I dwell.
     
Mar 10, 2014 12:51 |  #98

Aressem wrote in post #16747779 (external link)
The Sigma is the better lens, absolutely no doubt about it.

Wrong.


Bill is my name - I'm the most wanted man on my island, except I'm not on my island, of course. More's the pity.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Aressem
Goldmember
Avatar
4,364 posts
Gallery: 39 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 511
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Mar 10, 2014 13:19 |  #99

WhyFi wrote in post #16748224 (external link)
Wrong.

Care to elaborate? I know a lot of people who would strongly disagree.

See for yourself: http://fstoppers.com …on-l-and-sigma-comparison (external link)

And if you can't be bothered reading this, here is a quote to summarize:

The Verdict:

When we look at performance, the Sigma and Canon L trade blows back and forth, but when you throw in price point you can’t help but lean towards the Sigma. It was a close fight, but Sigma wins out. Not only is the Sigma just as sharp (if not sharper), it also better controls chromatic aberration without really failing in any one area. The Canon f/2 is not a bad lens, not at all. In fact, it’s a great lens. It’s just not as good as either the L glass (as expected) or the Sigma. The fact of the matter is that Sigma just outplayed Canon here. Sigma wins in price and performance, which is a really deadly combo. If you are looking for a 35mm lens for your Canon, you can’t beat the Sigma 35mm f/1.4. It’s just that good.


Ryan Mackay WEBSITE (external link) | FACEBOOK (external link) | GEAR LIST | Buy & Sell Feedback: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
WhyFi
Goldmember
Avatar
2,766 posts
Gallery: 237 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 804
Joined Apr 2008
Location: I got a castle in Brooklyn, that's where I dwell.
     
Mar 10, 2014 13:27 |  #100

Aressem wrote in post #16748313 (external link)
Care to elaborate?

Not terribly - any points that I'd make have already been stated in this thread multiple times. If you didn't absorb them already, would one more time make a difference?


Bill is my name - I'm the most wanted man on my island, except I'm not on my island, of course. More's the pity.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Aressem
Goldmember
Avatar
4,364 posts
Gallery: 39 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 511
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Mar 10, 2014 13:31 |  #101

WhyFi wrote in post #16748331 (external link)
Not terribly - any points that I'd make have already been stated in this thread multiple times. If you didn't absorb them already, would one more time make a difference?

So basically you're a Canon fanboy that can't admit the fact that Sigma has undoubtedly produced a far superior product. Got it! :rolleyes:


Ryan Mackay WEBSITE (external link) | FACEBOOK (external link) | GEAR LIST | Buy & Sell Feedback: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
WhyFi
Goldmember
Avatar
2,766 posts
Gallery: 237 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 804
Joined Apr 2008
Location: I got a castle in Brooklyn, that's where I dwell.
     
Mar 10, 2014 13:50 |  #102

Aressem wrote in post #16748340 (external link)
So basically you're a Canon fanboy that can't admit the fact that Sigma has undoubtedly produced a far superior product. Got it! :rolleyes:

It's funny that someone pointing the "fanboy" finger has twice declared one product to be "the better lens, absolutely no doubt about it" whilst I have made no such declarations. "Better," is subject to personal need and preference; these lenses have a lot of differences (besides price, which you claim is the sole determining factor) that could sway a user one way or the other. A non-fanboy would understand that.


Bill is my name - I'm the most wanted man on my island, except I'm not on my island, of course. More's the pity.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Aressem
Goldmember
Avatar
4,364 posts
Gallery: 39 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 511
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Mar 10, 2014 14:01 |  #103

WhyFi wrote in post #16748398 (external link)
It's funny that someone pointing the "fanboy" finger has twice declared one product to be "the better lens, absolutely no doubt about it" whilst I have made no such declarations. "Better," is subject to personal need and preference; these lenses have a lot of differences (besides price, which you claim is the sole determining factor) that could sway a user one way or the other. A non-fanboy would understand that.

Alright. So what is better about the Canon? Weight? Bokeh? Bokeh is totally personal preference but as far as sharpness and IQ goes, the Sigma simply outperforms the Canon in all respects. If you've got shaky hands for whatever reason, that's the only thing that would persuade anyone to buy the Canon in my honest opinion. Please, do elaborate if I've missed anything. Have you actually used either/both?


Ryan Mackay WEBSITE (external link) | FACEBOOK (external link) | GEAR LIST | Buy & Sell Feedback: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,348 posts
Gallery: 1718 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 10816
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Mar 10, 2014 14:06 |  #104

Aressem wrote in post #16748313 (external link)
Care to elaborate? I know a lot of people who would strongly disagree.

See for yourself: http://fstoppers.com …on-l-and-sigma-comparison (external link)

And if you can't be bothered reading this, here is a quote to summarize:

Heya,

Just something to add to the mix, a lot of people think the 35 F2 IS is better than the 35L, and not just due to some social reason, but because they have both and compared and found that at similar apertures the newer F2 IS simply was the same, and better in some cases. This is more due to modern new design. A lot of the cost is simply to distinguish market niche and premium label, instead of the mid-tier. Also, the 35L is not as good in the realm of glowing reviews as many of the `L's.

The Sigma is an exquisite lens. Looking at images, it definitely is a serious lens and crazy sharp even wide open.

But my bottom line point would be that reading a review and then spreading that person's opinion isn't a good way to sell someone on a lens. I would just look at real-world images, not test images, by normal people (if a normal person is looking to get the lens). Often times, people mistake a good photograph for being due to the "better" lens, and don't realize that really it's just a good photograph, regardless of which lens and often times, people with way lesser equipment take a better photograph. It's truly hard to judge a photo technically without your brain telling you it's not good, or is good, our eyes are built to send pleasure signals--hit the right signals and even a technically less sharp, or technically lesser image will still seem better to many. My argument is all over the place at this point, but my real point is, the end of the game is the photograph and really, real world photographs beat tests when comparing lenses.

And there's a lot of flavor of the month stuff in the gear-minded hobbyists here.

Also, if one were to quantify the differences instead of using terminology like "way better" and "other league" , etc, one might find the true difference to be only a few percentages. Kind of like in high end audio, where you pay thousands and thousands for maybe a 1~2% difference. If you pixel peep instead of look at an image at print size (which is what photography really results in... unless this is just a pixel peeping hobby for someone), you'll probably find the differences negligable. There's plenty of tests out there where someone used a junk camera and a decent lens, and a top tier camera and top tier lens, and did photographs and asked people to figure out which was done by the "better" setup. It was not conclusive. You can obviously do this yourself.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CaliWalkabout
Senior Member
Avatar
337 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2010
Location: Oakland, CA, USA
     
Mar 10, 2014 14:10 |  #105

Calling someone a fanboy is considered trolling on a lot of forums, and rightly so. It's accepted here, for some reason, and it really drags down the discussions comparing lenses.

The Sigma 35 and the Canon 35/2 are clearly different tools. I'm not sure why people get so absurdly personal about these things.


6D, 17-40L, 24L II, 50L, 100L, 70-300L.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

21,872 views & 1 like for this thread
Sigma 35 f1.4 or Canon 35 f2 IS
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is amdcasin
1809 guests, 282 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.