Confused 35mm: Sigma / Samyang / Canon

Pupu wrote in post #17004628
I'm on crop and looking for something better than Tamron 17-50 f2.8, in terms of more light. Apart from light need more seperation from subject in environmental portraits. So there are 4 options to choose from
- Samyang 35mm f1.4 - T stops seems to be pretty low (1.9) which will defeat the purpose of getting a fast apperture lens? Value for money. I dont have problem with manual focus as the application does not demand it.
- Sigma 35mm f1.4 - T stops is 1.6 on crop camera but costs double the Samyang along with AF.
- Canon 35mm f2 - T stop is 2.2 on crop not quite different from what I get in Tamron 17-50mm + old model.
- Canon 35mm L - T stop is 1.8 on crop and costs bomb, everything else is fine.

I plan to stay on crop for another couple of years. Dont want to buy a EFS lens as of now. What would you select and why?

Isn't the T-Stop transmission T3.4 on your Tamron?

The old 35mm f/2 is T2.2 but did you know thew new 35mm f/2 IS is T2.0?

msowsun wrote in post #17009017
Isn't the T-Stop transmission T3.4 on your Tamron?

The old 35mm f/2 is T2.2 but did you know thew new 35mm f/2 IS is T2.0?

Agree which is why I'm 'moving up'. f2 is not a major step-up in terms of light gathering abilities and DOF requirements. I'm looking for a particular look on crop as of now (if possible), till I move to FF. Shall post few examples by tonight.

35mm f2 IS looks good but for additional $100 I would rather get Sigma 35 Art.

What would you have done at my place?

I would get the EF 35mm f/2 IS for $549.

The Sigma 35mm 1.4 ART is $899. http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …+38+4291570227+​4291220258

35mm on a crop and 35mm on FF are considerably different; many people swear by one and don't care at all for the other - are you sure that 35mm on FF is your end goal?

As a lover of the moderately wide FoV, I wouldn't spend two years with a ~55mm equiv FoV - I'd personally skip the lens and get in to a FF body faster. Heck, the 40 pancake on FF will provide you with a more ideal mix of isolation and FoV (again, if that's what you're after) than the 35 f/2 IS would on a crop.

msowsun wrote in post #17009158
I would get the EF 35mm f/2 IS for $549.

The Sigma 35mm 1.4 ART is $899. http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …+38+4291570227+​4291220258

He's saying the pricing is much closer in India.

WhyFi wrote in post #17009181
He's saying the pricing is much closer in India.

If I lived in India, I think I would still buy the EF35mm f/2 IS since B&H ships to India.

ΟP I would like to point out that as far as low light performance you may use the T-stop as a yardstick. However, the maximum T-stop is not the end-all argument for low light shooting. ISO performance or use of flash are. What's the use to shoot at a razor thin 1.4 when you are trying to incorporate a group of people in the photo. iF THIS REQUIRES 5.6, YOUR CURRENT LENSES WILL DO.

Second, when you consider thin DOF/bokeh (different things) then f-stop and not t-stop is the yardstick. You can have (stretching it as an example) a f1.4 with t4.5 (a glaucoma case for sure), it will still produce a thinner DOF than a f2.8 t3.0... Creamier bokeh too...

Personally, I stick to f-stops when I do comparisons. Low light performance I seek from the ISO.

WhyFi wrote in post #17009178
35mm on a crop and 35mm on FF are considerably different; many people swear by one and don't care at all for the other - are you sure that 35mm on FF is your end goal?

As a lover of the moderately wide FoV, I wouldn't spend two years with a ~55mm equiv FoV - I'd personally skip the lens and get in to a FF body faster. Heck, the 40 pancake on FF will provide you with a more ideal mix of isolation and FoV (again, if that's what you're after) than the 35 f/2 IS would on a crop.

This! Only for me I much prefer 55mm to 35mm. I bought the Canon 35/2 back when I had my T2i instead if the Sigma 30mm for the same reason as the OP, then sold it after moving to FF anyway because I couldn't get into using the 35mm FOV on my 6D.

I'm firmly in the camp for buying what you need now and not worrying about later. Lenses hold their value, it'll be a small loss if you sell it in 2 years, just think of the small amount of money you lose when selling it as your rental price for a 2 year lease

For what it's worth, I bought my 35/2 for $200 used and sold it over a year later for $225. The way I see it I made $25 to rent a lens for over a year.

On a crop camera I may opt for the 30mm Sigma. I have the 35mm ART on my 5D2 and am hoping to pick up the 50 when it becomes easily available. The sharpness of the Sigma is amazing. I would skip the Canon 35L. In my limited side by side testing the Sigma performed better at hundreds less in cost.

I have the f2 but I use it on a FF. I'm not a big WA fan tho, if I was, I'd probably get a 20.

msowsun wrote in post #17009158
I would get the EF 35mm f/2 IS for $549.

The Sigma 35mm 1.4 ART is $899.

I got the 35 IS for $549. It was a big upgrade over the old 35 2. I can't compare it to the Sigma 35 Art 'cuz I've never touched one. But, I'd rather have an excellent lens at f/2 with IS than spend $300 more for 1 stop of light and no IS. For me, subject matter can sit still for 1/30 of a second, I need some help from time to time.

msowsun wrote in post #17009196
If I lived in India, I think I would still buy the EF35mm f/2 IS since B&H ships to India.

Just so that you can relate

Sigma 35 A
http://www.ebay.in …_slr_camera_len​ses_optics

Vs Canon 35mm F2
http://www.ebay.in …ash=item19e4b31​4bd&_uhb=1

If imported that will attract 30% import duty + shipping (approx $100 min) + No warranty.

Of the lenses you listed I'd go with the sigma 35.

With that said, I'm with Sirrith, sigma 18-35 on a crop! I understand the "I want to go FF" argument but honestly, if you like the 35mm focal length on a crop camera you might find it to wide on a ff camera.

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #17009249
This! Only for me I much prefer 55mm to 35mm. I bought the Canon 35/2 back when I had my T2i instead if the Sigma 30mm for the same reason as the OP, then sold it after moving to FF anyway because I couldn't get into using the 35mm FOV on my 6D.

I'm firmly in the camp for buying what you need now and not worrying about later. Lenses hold their value, it'll be a small loss if you sell it in 2 years, just think of the small amount of money you lose when selling it as your rental price for a 2 year lease

For what it's worth, I bought my 35/2 for $200 used and sold it over a year later for $225. The way I see it I made $25 to rent a lens for over a year.

I like both 35mm and 50mm FOV (on both crop and FF) but as of now I can afford only one (primes). I use the tamron set to either 35/50 when I'm using it. Other times @ 17mm. And I think 35mm @ f1.4 gives nice perspective compared. see these Vs 50mm (both crop and FF examples)

Agree I can use ISO and flash but since I have experimented both these options and remained thirsty therefore in search for a fast prime.

Lets see if I can get Canon 35 f2 IS from US, through some relative.

all these are full body examples with 35mm.

Disclaimer: None of them are pictures clicked by me. Posting it here for reference only.

https://www.flickr.com …56218/in/pool-2064616@N24

https://www.flickr.com …0635/in/pool-2064616@N24/

https://www.flickr.com …6753/in/pool-2064616@N24/

https://www.flickr.com …2965/in/pool-2064616@N24/

https://www.flickr.com …2681/in/pool-2064616@N24/

https://www.flickr.com …6244/in/pool-2064616@N24/

https://www.flickr.com …59610/in/pool-2064616@N24

https://www.flickr.com …06722/in/pool-2064616@N24

https://www.flickr.com …66163/in/pool-2064616@N24

https://www.flickr.com …3072/in/pool-2064616@N24/