Low Light Indoor Primes: 24L II vs 35L vs Sigma 30

Well, since my brother in law went out of his way to spend time with us during our visit to Korea, i just gave him my Siggy 30 1.4...

now i need a short indoor fast lens... considering either a 24L II or a 35L...

seems both of these lenses are spectacular... do they really shine over a sigma 30 1.4?

cost, yea, it's quite a bit much... but i've been good... saved a bit... and able to splurge...

thoughts?

main use is for work... product shots, indoor showrooms and whatnot...

On a crop, stick with the Sigma 30mm.

kinghong1970 wrote in post #10884823
seems both of these lenses are spectacular... do they really shine over a sigma 30 1.4?

Yes.

I used to own the Sig and now have to 35L. The L is the better lens but the Sig is no slouch as I'm sure you know. If you plan on staying on a crop body pick up another Sig unless that money is really burning a hole in your wallet.

Depends on how much you're willing to spend.

24L II is fantastic in every way. Just see which focal length will be better.

Once I got the Sigma calibrated after multiple trips back to Long Island, I was very happy with the lens. The 35L is better wide open, has better color and contrast, but not by a HUGE margin. The 24L II on the other hand, is better than the 35 in many ways. Micro-contrast is spectacular, CA is controlled incredibly well, etc.

My vote would be 24L II if you have the funds. If not, get the Sigma again or go full frame to get all the advantages of the 35L

hahaha... thanks for the replies...

no, the money is not burning a hole in my wallet but otoh, i don't mind spending on a good piece of glass.

i'm leaning towards the 24L II at the moment... and it seems that it's a close race between that and the Sigma 30 again...

kinghong1970 wrote in post #10885015
hahaha... thanks for the replies...

no, the money is not burning a hole in my wallet but otoh, i don't mind spending on a good piece of glass.

i'm leaning towards the 24L II at the moment... and it seems that it's a close race between that and the Sigma 30 again...

If indoors only on a crop I'd probably go 24L II. However, if its also to be used outdoors I'd probably favor the 35mm L. I used my 17-55mm to evaluate which focal length suits my uses better. Especially outdoors, the 35mm is closer to the focal length I would general use to shot a subject with their surroundings, especially in low light situations. The 24L is great indoors though when you want to get just a little bit more in the view. Really between these two I would think you have the ability to judge which FL is correct. The other differences between the two lenses are fairly minor.

agreed...

when using the sigma 30, there were times when i felt that it was a "bit" long indoors... having to step back a bit to take pics of long coats on models and whatnot...

but anywhoo, i'll play around with the FL on my 24-105 and decide...

On APS-C you'll be hard-pressed to see a difference between the Sigma and the 35L. On bigger formats, it's a different story of course.

No experience with the 24L but it seems like a great lens.

Cesium wrote in post #10885134
On APS-C you'll be hard-pressed to see a difference between the Sigma and the 35L. On bigger formats, it's a different story of course.

Agreed.

And the Sigma is much smaller and lighter.

I'd get a 24LII or a ZE 35 Distagon. I used to have the Distagon, it's an absolutely amazing lens.

Out of these 3, I voted for the 24LII.

I bought 35L for both 5d2 and 7d and have never experienced with 24L.

tyvm for your inputs folks...

i've felt the 35mm was a bit too long in indoor/tradeshow booths and small showrooms and so i went ahead with the 24L II... should be here on tuesday... ish...