Canon 28mm f/1.8 vs. Sigma 28mm f/1.8

Apologies if this topic has already been covered, but I searched and was not able to find anything immediately relevant.

Does anyone here have any experience that could speak to a comparison of these two lenses? I am looking to use whichever one I select as a "general purpose" prime lens (a walk around, if you will) but am having a hard time finding reviews on the Sigma. Knowing the reputation of the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 somewhat scares me off of the 28.

Any input would be helpful, I am hoping to buy very soon.

give this a try:

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=484367

I have found the Canon AF to be fast and accurate even in low light, also has a good colour, contrast and flare resistance. Very sharp in the centre but much less so at the corners and edge, but more than good enough for low light applications where corner-to-corner sharpness is not needed or indeed generally desired.

I would get the Canon 28 over the Sigma 28 for its smaller size and ring USM with FTM. That said, I would get the Sigma 30 over either.

Had the 28/1.8 - was never really happy with it. It was good, but just didn't sparkle. I had the Sigma 20mm f1.8 for a while - not the 28 - but didn't like the build or IQ.

People say the Sigma 30/1.4 is the job, and from what I've seen on the web, it certainly looks the best...

I have the canon 28 1.8 - it gathers a ton of dust.

I too would look at the Sigma 30 1.4

Croasdail wrote in post #6477528
I have the canon 28 1.8 - it gathers a ton of dust.

As in, you don't use it?

I've considered the Sigma 30 but have heard enough stories about focusing issues that I have thought to stay away from it. If you get a good copy out of the box you're golden, but I'm not feeling lucky.

ChromeThunder wrote in post #6478496
As in, you don't use it?

I've considered the Sigma 30 but have heard enough stories about focusing issues that I have thought to stay away from it. If you get a good copy out of the box you're golden, but I'm not feeling lucky.

Your Sigma 10-20 is known for having issues out of the box. You satisfied?

angryhampster wrote in post #6478889
Your Sigma 10-20 is known for having issues out of the box. You satisfied?

I am. I find I use it more than the other two combined, actually.

if you don't want to second guess if you'll get a good copy of sigma 30 then just get a canon 28 1.8, very cute little lens.

If you're not going to get the Sigma 30, get the Canon 28. It's a very nice lens. Fast, accurate AF, good sharpness from about f/2.2 onward, acceptable for the most part wide open. Very nice skin tone rendition. I had one for about 2 years. I recently got the Sigma 30 to replace it. Had to go through 3 copies and a calibration, but now it's good. AF still isn't quite as accurate as the Canon 28, but it's decent. I needed the 2/3 stop, though, and the Sigma is quite sharp straight from f/1.4. I'd say the Sigma at f/1.4 is about as sharp as the Canon at f/2.2. The Sigma also keeps its contrast high throughout the range, while the Canon has lowered contrast at f/1.8 and f/2. Both have decent bokeh, but the Sigma 30's is just that much creamier.

Overall, the Canon is a very, very nice lens if you don't need f/1.4.

Had the Sigma 28mm and tested against the Sigma 30mm. For me, the close focusing, the bokeh, and the price of the 28mm f1.8 outweighs the poor AF performance.
The 30mm does focus very fast but you can't use it for close focusing work.
I've reviewed both here.
http://tomyi.smugmug.c​om …895_jMDFd#11432​5968_EywF2

You have a misunderstanding about what bokeh is. It's not how much the background is thrown out of focus...it's the QUALITY of those highlights. I'd be hard pressed to see the 28 have better bokeh, as the Sigma 30 has some of the nicest bokeh I've ever seen in a lens of that length (though it wouldn't surprise me if they were similar). I think the 30's bokeh is superior to the 35L's bokeh. For a fair bokeh test, you need to find a VERY busy background, with a lot of specular highlights, and shoot all the lenses with the same framing...then you can judge the quality of the OOF highlights, not just the amount. (Otherwise, macro lenses would immediately always have the best bokeh...they are often nice, but we're not talking about ability to throw the background OOF...but the quality of when it IS OOF.) The background in your bokeh test is simple, such that pretty much any lens will render it nicely, and going to max magnification is not a fair test of bokeh. Now, you can say "the 28's max magnification is a great plus over the 30" which will naturally imply it's shallower DOF at close focus.

No, I realize that bokeh is referring to the quality of the out of focus area. I think from having used the lens, the Sigma 28mm f1.8 is nice. For the OOF test, I'm mainly trying to show how close you can get to the subject and how OOF the background can be.

The Sigma 28 has 9 (round IIRC) aperture blades, which generally help to produce very nice bokeh.
The Sigma 30mm has 8 blades. I'd assume 8 is about as good as 9 though. Also when you consider that you can get much closer to the subject with the 28 than the 30 prime, in real world situations, you can get more creative in your compositions by getting close to the subject and blurring out the background more with a nice smooth OOF area and perfectly round spots for little lights and such.

These were taken with the sigma 28.