Canon 28mm f/1.8 vs. Sigma 30mm f/1.4 ? Any thoughts?
189243
J. ONeill says: Did you make a decision? I am currently debating the same two lenses. I am leaning towards the Canon since it seems there are quite a few quality/AF issues with the Sigma. Any advice is appreciated. If you own a camera with micro focus adjustment like the 50D or 7D, Sigmas front or back focusing is a non-issue. Also, even if you don't own a camera with micro focus adjustment, if you get a Sigma lens that front or back focuses, you can send it to Sigma for calibration.
1966952
Did you make a decision? I am currently debating the same two lenses. I am leaning towards the Canon since it seems there are quite a few quality/AF issues with the Sigma. Any advice is appreciated.
501124
I'm in the same boat. I have a 40d as well and I just bought the Canon 50mm 1.8 but found that I was always "stepping back" to take a lot of indoor shots. I am leaning towards either the Sigma 30 1.4 or Canon 24 f2.8. The 24 got a good review at the photozone.de site. Here's a direct link if Amazon will let it through: http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/153-canon-ef-24mm-f28-test-report--review?start=2.They review just about every lens. Check it out. Again, it's photozone (dot) de
305765
I generally use prime lens so, perhaps, I am not the best person to ask. With this said, the 28 f1.8 is excellent optically. On a D800E, the 100% view is tack sharp (assuming good shooting technique). You print excellent quality 17 16 by 20 or so. I haven't tested beyond that. The rendering is also very good. Hard to believe that the 28 - 300 would be an equal.
1594405
I have never used the 11-16 but did research it before buying this lens. I think you will be quite happy with either one and can't really go wrong. They are both sharp, excellent lenses. In my mind the principal trade off is whether you want a slightly wider angle view (there really is a pretty big difference btwn 12mm and 11mm) and a wider aperture or whether you want the extra versatility on the other end since the 12-28 lens goes up to 28mm. Pics are definitely usable at 28mm in my opinion. Ken Rockwell has a great review of both. The only thing I don't agree with him on with regards to the 12-28mm is that I am noticing some CA that I have to remove in post processing (not a big deal to me but worth noting). I will try to post a few sample pics later today. Hope that helps and happy shooting!
1756271
I am a serious amateur. After comparing both lens, I concluded that the sigma is a better deal.After purchasing the Sigma I could not be happier with my purchase, it's an excellent lens for the money, I love it!
633524
I have the EF 85mm f/1.8 USM. It's my go to lens especially for taking shots of my fast moving son. I don't mind standing away from him that way I can take more candid shots, more day-to-day happenings & on-the-spot mischievous events. I have not tried the 28 though so... this more on the 85. I do use this inside of the house. It takes some getting used to initially but once I got used to the 85, it's my main lens now... ^_^ I hope this helps!
1249481
Yeah, Diverhank nailed it - two very different lenses. Important to note that the 50mm 1.4 is NOT a macro lens and that was something you mentioned in your initial post. I used the 50mm on my T2i and absolutely loved it, though I eventually upgraded (and much preferred) the Sigma 30mm 1.4 for the "normal" focal length on the crop-sensor. I now shoot a full frame and primarily use the 50mm but will likely get the 100mm shortly. Be sure to take a look at the Sigma 30mm before buying the 50mm Canon but if Macro is what you're looking for, you can't go wrong with the 100mm L.
2152800
Great，I use the sigma 30mm f2.8 lens, it's just approximate 1 pound. I bought it cost $449 with 18-55 and sigma 30mm lens is 120 dollar~
1183540
I've never used the canon 85mm but the there is almost no difference in sharpness with th Sigma lens. The price difference is only justified by the lower F stop.
316099
Sharp lens, at 120mm its longer than the 1.8 45mm, which works out to 90mm. It is a bit slower, but just as sharp. Yes and no, it gets you close from the edges of a room, head shots are fine, its a cheaper alternative to the oly 75mm.The 25mm 1.8 might be more useful, I have the sigma 60. Do it all would be the pro zoom, but its pricy. The sigma would be great on the omd, at the price it'd hard to beat. If you do not have many primes, its a good start.
108096
Honestly unless you are making good money off of it go with the 28mm 1.8 it is fantastic. The 24mm is exceptional but 9 times out of ten you will have the same image for 3x the price and twice the weight/size.
1646078
Both lenses are excellent and brilliantly sharp. The Sigma is less expensive. The Canon focuses more quickly, a little, no macro lenses are fast. It should come down to what focal length you want. Canon offers an IS version of the macro. The stabilization is nice if you hand hold, but doubles the price and weight.
543324
My copy of the Sigma was horrendous. I had to send it back. Ended up buying the 35mm version of the Sigma (the new Artisan series) and that one's MUCH sharper than the equivalent Canon 1.4.
2041779
There is at least one good comparison of the two lenses on youtube. Check out the videos and determine for yourself which lens fits your needs better. The f/1.4 is my first non-L lens; the add'l cost and weight made the f/1.2 less of a good fit for me.
1170784
I have the same dilemna. However, I am currently thinking that the 28-135mm is better suited on the basis that it is USM and therefore quicker to focus. I've had non-USM lenses before which tend to aimlessly go back and forth trying to focus when shooting in normal to low light. Since you have an APS-C rather than full frame camera, the 28-135 is equivalent to a 45mm-216mm which to me is enough zoom since I am not into sport photography. Hope this helps
1346887
I have the 85mm 1.8 and a digital rebel. With a crop sensor camera, the 85mm is really tough indoors - you have to stand across the room and then you likely will only get a little more than a face in the frame. I don't own the 1.4, but I'd guess it would be better for a lot of tight indoor shooting over the 85mm 1.8 on a crop camera.