Wide Prime to complimet 50 1.4

So maybe you have seen other threads maybe you havent.... Ive been debating on zooms and decided on the 24-105 L for its versatility outdoors with range and IS.

Indoors and at night, id love some recommendations to go with my 50mm 1.4

Been looking @ BH and see

Canon 24mm F2.8
Canon 28mm F1.8
Canon 35mm F2.0


which would you all think would be a better choice? (also -- USA or Imported)

Sigma 30 1.4

Better IQ, better build, cheaper than the 28 1.8, and faster than the others.

edit: also, go for USA. That way you get the 4 year warranty since its an EX lens.

i have the 35 f2...just bought it cause it was cheap, and I'm hoping it'll hold me over until i can afford the sigma...if you can afford the canon 28mm f1.8 you can afford the sigma...so i'd go there, uunless you're going FF in a week...

What concerns me with going with Sig is i read reviews on BH and some of them have AF issues, loud, not accurate, etc...

concern?

If you're using a 600D, even a 24mm f/2.8 will only be a 38mm lens. Possibly a 10-20mm Sigma or EF-S 10-22mm instead? I use a 24mm f/2.8 on a 5D and it's nice and wide. It is decently sharp in the centre wide open, and decent all around when stopped down. It's not supurb, but it gets the job done.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/13931652@N00/6​159653382/

SouthFlorida_Tron wrote in post #13155818
What concerns me with going with Sig is i read reviews on BH and some of them have AF issues, loud, not accurate, etc...

concern?

Overblown.

I realise that I can't speak for everyone, but the large majority of people with the sigma 30 have had no issues. I tried 3 copies myself and they were all dead on.

IMO, this is one of the must-have lenses for crop.

I think the number of posts in the sigma 30 sample pictures thread alone should be enough to at least hint that it is all-round better than the other options available. It has close to 3x the activity of the threads of the lenses you originally posted, combined.

but im not so much concerned about crop, its for when i need to go wider than the 50mm @ night, which is my go to lens... so i would think id prefer a stop lower than 2.8, which is why i think the 24 is out... cuz of the 2.8

the sigma 30 does seem to egt a lot of recommendations.

from your suggestions....

Canon 24mm F2.8
Canon 28mm F1.8

i think i'd take the f/1.8 over an extra 4mm of width personally.

I use Canon 28/1.8 and 20/2.8... and am happy with them on my crop cameras.

24/2.8 and 35/2 are not USM lenses and are a notch below the above lenses in overall build quality. Shame, really, since I'd like to have a 24mm and 35mm, but not really ready to go all the way to the 24L and 35L (probably will end up with the latter, though. These are not important focal lengths to me on my crop sensor cameras, but are two focal lengths I like a lot on full frame, so became more important to me when I added a 5DII to my kit a couple years ago.

USA or Imported only matters if you ever need to make a warranty claim. The USA will be covered by Canon. The Imported lens won't be... you'll have to send it to B&H (in this case).

Heck, I've bought several lenses that were refurbished and more than a few used lenses. Refurbs usually have a short warranty. Used lenses might if bought from a dealer... But usually won't have any sort of warranty if bought from a private party.

I would only choose between the 28/1.8, 35/2 or Sigma 30/1.4. 2.8 is too slow. If you only want 2.8, get the Tamron 17-50 non VC instead.

I picked the 30/1.4 and I am very happy with it. I got a copy right off the bat that doesn't need any MFA. The 35/2 has a 5 bladed aperture and produces bokeh like my 50/1.8 and I don't like the pentagon shapped OOF highlights.

It really was a toss up between the 30/1.4 and 28/1.8, but the extra 2/3 stop and included hood for a little less money tipped the scales to the Sigma.

SouthFlorida_Tron wrote in post #13155818
What concerns me with going with Sig is i read reviews on BH and some of them have AF issues, loud, not accurate, etc...

concern?

yeah good.
dont get the sigma.

I can safely recommend the Sigma 24mm F1.8, a severely underrated lens(and it is also the lens that I seem to be using the most as of late). It's more or less the equivalent of a 35mm lens on a crop body, which in my view is an even more useful field of view than a 50mm would give on a FF body... and complements the 50mm F1.4 far better than a 28mm/30mm lens ever would.
Why choose it over the Canon 24mm F2.8? Well, F1.8 of course.

Is that sigma 24mm built way?

Compare build to say canon 50mm 1.4 > 1.8

The Devil wrote in post #13157531
even more useful field of view than a 50mm would give on a FF body... and complements the 50mm F1.4 far better than a 28mm/30mm lens ever would.

Depends entirely on your shooting style of course. Personally I can't stand that focal length, so for me it would not complement any lens better than my 30 1.4.

But if you're fine with the focal length of the 24, then the sigma also gets my vote over the canon 24 2.8. You can find a thread on here somewhere showing a comparison between the sigma and the canon 24 L if you want, and the sigma stacks up quite well.

And the sigma is build nicely, yes, better than the canon 50 1.4 IMO.

what about the sigma 20mm or 24mm 1.8's, looks to be built quite well....?

or will the 1.4 and HSM on the 30mm serve me better, remember this will be for low light situations, & the 50 will be my go to, this will be for when shots are tight :P