35mm Lens?

Canon 35mm 1.4L - $1329.00

or

Sigma 35mm 1.4 ART - $899.00


Besides the big difference in price, what do you think about these two lens'? Which do you think is better?
I want to mainly use it for family group photos and weddings.

I don't have either, but based on feedback, the Sigma seems to have better IQ.

Hi Sparrow - I've never used the Sigma so I have no first (or second) had experience with it let alone any knowledge. I have owned the Canon 35mm f/1.4 for several years now and it is a wonderful lens. You can almost shoot in the dark with it and I have it teemed with a 5D III. It is relatively lightweight, fast focusing and just a lot of fun to use.

This particular shot was done a couple of months ago, ISO 6400, 1/100 second @f 3.5. I did some mild noise cleanup in ACR but the lens performed beautifully, nailing focus right where I intended.

Family group shots at f/1.4? That is not where I'd start. If you're stopping down to f/2.8-f/5.6, why not the 35IS? $599.

I hear what you're saying, and no, I wouldn't do family shots at 1.4. But I could also use this lens for dark wedding receptions and the 1.8 might be exactly what I'd need. I look at it as: I'd rather have it and not need it, then not have it and need it.

Sparrow19 wrote in post #17406042
Canon 35mm 1.4L - $1329.00

or

Sigma 35mm 1.4 ART - $899.00


Besides the big difference in price, what do you think about these two lens'? Which do you think is better?
I want to mainly use it for family group photos and weddings.

My short answer: I think the Sigma is better overall, even if money was no concern.

My semi short answer: While some people complain about the Sigma needing to be adjusted using the USB dock, some (perhaps more) people complain about the focus-shift of the Canon, which unfortunately can not be corrected so easily, if at all. The Sigma is noticeably sharper. The Canon has slightly better bokeh. The Canon seemed to achieve focus slightly faster in very low light. Niether are weather-sealed. Both are well-constructed. For the extra $400, I would expect much more.

I think the 35L is desperately due for an updated MKII version. I'm not knocking the lens by any means, but IMHO it is outperformed by a cheaper lens.

Yes Sigma 1.4 Art is better, I upgraded my 35 1.4L to this one (in fact it was so good that I bought the 50 1.4 Art on top of it )

Thanks for the info everyone. Even the sales guy at the store suggested the Sigma over the Canon.

***Someone please correct me if I am wrong. I will delete this comment if incorrect.***

Last year while researching fast primes, another user mentioned a key difference that stuck with me.

When using AF, the lens focuses wide open and only stopped down when the shutter is pressed.

(Assume it is very dark like that posted photo above, and other variables from shot to shot are controlled)

A 35mm f1.4 lens shooting at f2.8 will be able to focus first at f1.4 then stop down to take the photo.

A 35mm f2.8 lens (with IS turned off) on an identical camera cannot auto focus at f2.8 as the light is too low.

Therefore: even though they are set to the same aperture. The fast lens can achieve focus when the slower lens can't.

Yep, that´s right, and that´s why focus shift is a problem for autofocus lenses.
The lens will focus at its maximum aperture and confirm. But when you press the shutter the aperture is stopped down and the focus shift occurs. Therefore, on a lens which has focus shift your image will be out of focus.

If you are using manual focus, you can use the DOF preview button to stop the lens down while you focus, solving the problem. I´m not sure if that applies to autofocus.

This is very interesting and I am not in a position to dispute it. All I can say though is that I am not aware of this ever happening with my Canon lens. The particular shot above was part of a series that was done under miserable lighting conditions. I had duds but those I'd chalk up to bad timing on my part and careless shooting. The keepers were excellent.

Will this happen when you pre-focus at 2.8 and then move to shoot at 4.0/5.6?

Wait - on further thought, what am I missing here? Using one shot AF my camera will focus wide open at f/1.4 with that particular lens, LOCKING the focus point right on the target. The metering for that particular shot though was 3.5 so the lens stopped down at the moment the shutter was fully depressed. With the focus already locked, why are you saying it will shift when it stops down to 3.5? If anything the DOV will get marginally deeper, but that focus point won't shift - it's locked.

Maybe this is getting off subject, but I don't understand anything you guys are now talking about, ha. I just wanted to know which was the better lens and experiences people had with them.

This thread is being "hijacked"

We are now talking about lens focus shift. It could be good or better, depending on how you use/look at it.