Sigma 30mm F 1.4 vs Canon 35mm F2.0 vs Canon 28mm F1.8

[speedtest99]

Sigma 30mm F1.4 around $750
Canon 35mm F2.0 around $400
Canon 28mm f1.8 around $700

which is better, read review from http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos, seems like 35mm got better review, plus the price is cheaper despite the built quality.

I will be using it for low light condition such as restuarant, indoor, pub etc. I don't think my 18-200mm can do a good job. And my 50mm F1.8 is not wide enough, need to step back a few steps.

I know there is 35mm f1.4 L, but my budget is less than 800.

What is your views for the above 3 lens?

 

[grantyale]

"Despite" isn't the right word here, is it?
Optically Sigma 30 is the best among the three if you get a "good copy". The two Canons are both softer and have harsher bokeh. That said, for a normal focal length, 50/1.4 on FF is hard to beat.

 

[speedtest99]

beside boleh, how about IQ, which is better?

 

[HVB88]

Dont forget that sigma is only for crop body...

 

[speedtest99]

i know, and i have no plans to go into FF in the near future.

 

[speedtest99]

any of the above lens user like to comment?

 

[auden09]

i'd say go for the canon 35f/2. you won't go wrong. u arent using this for professional work right? then no harm. don't worry about bokeh. it doesn't really matter much if u are just using it for your personal use and its way within your budget. i myself downgraded from a 50 f/1.4 to 50 f/1.8 and to my surprise the bokeh doesn't bother me at all. so unless u r pretty anal about the creaminess of a bokeh or u r doing professional work...den i'd still say 35 f/2! =D anyway, gong xi fa cai. u getting this lens for cny?

 

[Garion]

i know, and i have no plans to go into FF in the near future.

Get the Sigma 30mm f1.4 then. Though I have not used one before, but its the most highly recommended amongst the three.

 

[speedtest99]

i'd say go for the canon 35f/2. you won't go wrong. u arent using this for professional work right? then no harm. don't worry about bokeh. it doesn't really matter much if u are just using it for your personal use and its way within your budget. i myself downgraded from a 50 f/1.4 to 50 f/1.8 and to my surprise the bokeh doesn't bother me at all. so unless u r pretty anal about the creaminess of a bokeh or u r doing professional work...den i'd still say 35 f/2! =D anyway, gong xi fa cai. u getting this lens for cny?

gong xi fa cai to you too, getting a lens for my coming Europe Tour, but is F2 sufficient enough in low night?

 

[speedtest99]

Get the Sigma 30mm f1.4 then. Though I have not used one before, but its the most highly recommended amongst the three.

thanks, this is my biggest headache, at F1.4, is it really better in low light if compare to F2? I am trying not to use flash.

 

[Garion]

thanks, this is my biggest headache, at F1.4, is it really better in low light if compare to F2? I am trying not to use flash.

For low lighting f1.4 does make a difference - its a full stop faster than f2. But if you don't shoot in low light very often, then the 35mm f2 is quite sufficient for most purposes.

 

[spartacus.ret]

getting a lens for my coming Europe Tour, but is F2 sufficient enough in low night?

hardly.

i always find myself in a variety of dim lighting and almost pitch dark situations all the time, and i find having every iso and aperture stop so valuable to get a faster shutter speed.

 

[spartacus.ret]

thanks, this is my biggest headache, at F1.4, is it really better in low light if compare to F2? I am trying not to use flash.

yes and no.

yes: with your ISO pushed to its maximum setting, having an extra stop of light can mean the difference between 1/15 and 1/30 which could translate into the difference between a clear and blurry shot.

no: i'm not too sure how reliable sigma's HSM is in dim lighting.

 

[spartacus.ret]

I will be using it for low light condition such as restuarant, indoor, pub etc.

the 35/2 fares extremely poorly in dim lighting. its ancient arc-focus drive has proved itself to me time and time again to be a disappointment.

it can still work though, if you're willing to manually focus.

nonetheless, its size and focal length for me makes me reluctant to sell it.

 

[rocketatw]

hi everyone,

lets say i have Can 18-55mm IS and Sigma 30mm F1.4

if 2 lens, both set at 30mm with same ISO and same aperture and everything the same, will the sigma outperform the kit lens for low light, outdoor and landscape.

 

[chua beng]

Make it simple:
35 - not wide enough. Forget it.
30/1.4 sigma - requires experience to check if it's a good copy. It's known to be inconsistent in quality control. And being only for crop sensors, you will have less audience to buy it next time if you wanna sell it as compared to a ff lens.
28/1.8 - the most budget, value for money option.

If you can, go to a shop n try both sigma n canon 28/1.8. On the spot, you can see n feel which you like. Forget about the 35 since you need the width.

My friend has got a 28/1.8 to let go at $600, if you want. Feel free to pm me. All the best in your search.

 

[takengo2003]

i think among the 3, 28mm is the sexiest, 30mm has the toughest look, and 35mm got the most plastic look.

 

[engrmariano]

30/1.4 vs 28/1.8

30/1.4 vs 35/2.0

 

[takengo2003]

30/1.4 vs 28/1.8

30/1.4 vs 35/2.0

seems like sigma is the winner between this 3 lens, espcially in IQ and boleh.

 

[spartacus.ret]

30/1.4 sigma - being only for crop sensors, you will have less audience to buy it next time if you wanna sell it as compared to a ff lens.

right. considering a vast vast vast majority of dslrs in the market are aps-c sensors :think: