# Sigma 35MM F/1.4 DG HSM Worth the price



## eersoy (Jan 3, 2013)

Hi

I enjoy portraits of family & friends mostly on my old 450D, and planning to get an indoor portrait lens addition to my EFS 15-85. Does Sigma 35MM F/1.4 DG HSM really worth the price or should I get the cheap EF 40 f/2.8 STM?

Regards

Efe Ersoy


----------



## kubelik (Jan 3, 2013)

for portraits on a crop body, you might also want to consider the 50mm f/1.4 USM by Canon. it's around twice as much as the 40 f/2.8, but half as much as the Sigma 35 f/1.4, and will give you a shallower DOF by far than either of the other two lenses.


----------



## Invertalon (Jan 3, 2013)

The Sigma is fantastic... Truly "L Glass" without the price... I really love mine. Build quality is better than the 35L by far, and the IQ is superior as well. For hundreds less.


----------



## dswatson83 (Jan 4, 2013)

The Sigma is so good, I pick it up even when I know I should be using a different focal length and just wish I had one of these lenses in a 50mm and 85mm. My Canon 50mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.8 are jealous. Seriously, this is one of my favorite lenses. Check out the review: http://learningcameras.com/reviews/7-lenses/86-sigma-35mm-f14-review

And then look at it blow away the Canon 35mm f/1.4: http://learningcameras.com/reviews/7-lenses/87-sigma-35mm-f14-vs-canon-35mm-f14

And blow away the new Canon 35mm f/2 IS: http://learningcameras.com/reviews/7-lenses/90-canon-35mm-f2-is-vs-sigma-35mm-f14

Obviously you don't get IS in the Sigma but this lens is L glass quality and even better in some cases for hardly more $$$ than the cheap stuff from Canon.


----------



## pdirestajr (Jan 4, 2013)

dswatson83 said:


> The Sigma is so good, I pick it up even when I know I should be using a different focal length and just wish I had one of these lenses in a 50mm and 85mm. My Canon 50mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.8 are jealous. Seriously, this is one of my favorite lenses. Check out the review: http://learningcameras.com/reviews/7-lenses/86-sigma-35mm-f14-review
> 
> And then look at it blow away the Canon 35mm f/1.4: http://learningcameras.com/reviews/7-lenses/87-sigma-35mm-f14-vs-canon-35mm-f14
> 
> ...



They need to work on their video reviews. The volume levels are all over the place and they spend way too much time zoomed out filming this dude talking. Why so few up close shots while he is describing it??


----------



## RS2021 (Jan 4, 2013)

pdirestajr said:


> dswatson83 said:
> 
> 
> > The Sigma is so good, I pick it up even when I know I should be using a different focal length and just wish I had one of these lenses in a 50mm and 85mm. My Canon 50mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.8 are jealous. Seriously, this is one of my favorite lenses. Check out the review: http://learningcameras.com/reviews/7-lenses/86-sigma-35mm-f14-review
> ...



Dswatson83 is the reviewer I think on that youtube clip...and he has been promoting his review links here heavily... Talks about the number of aperture blades as a surrogate for bokeh but doesnt show comparison pics with 35L...he shows other comparisons however...then there was the f stop debacle in a different clip i think. All said, neither an accurate nor an unbiased source. 

But one has to applaud his industry


----------



## sdsr (Jan 4, 2013)

eersoy said:


> Hi
> 
> I enjoy portraits of family & friends mostly on my old 450D, and planning to get an indoor portrait lens addition to my EFS 15-85. Does Sigma 35MM F/1.4 DG HSM really worth the price or should I get the cheap EF 40 f/2.8 STM?



I wouldn't consider either unless you find yourself taking portrait photos as wide as 35 or 40mm; assuming you've been taking portrait photos with your 15-85, see what focal lengths you've been using most and proceed from there. (Of course, there are lots of other reasons to want either or both lenses....)


----------



## EvilTed (Jan 4, 2013)

I have a 40mm F/2.8 and it's an excellent, light weight and sharp lens for a fantastic price.

The Sigma, I tried over the holidays, but returned it.

My reasons:

1. It's not as super sharp as DxO makes out. It's barely sharper at F/2.8 than the 40mm.
2. It has documented focus issues with the Canon bodies. I thought it was just me, but have since read that others are having the same issues.
3. It heavy as 'L' (there's a new one for you Ken  ).

I ended up returning it and will wait for the new Canon 35mm F/1.4 L II.

I'd get the 40mm for sharpness or the 50mm F/1.4 for a more dreamy wide open look with better DoF.

HTH

ET


----------



## RS2021 (Jan 4, 2013)

EvilTed said:


> ... and will wait for the new Canon 35mm F/1.4 L II.



As much as I am hoping the 35L II shows up in the next week....the closer we get to the date, the more the thought occurs that this is just Canon planting rumors to keep us all strung along for longer...perpetually waiting for the lens that ain't gonna show up for a while . 

While there is not a chance in hell I will jump on the Sigma 35 1.4 bandwagon...as for the Canon's version II of the 35L ... I will believe it when I see it...


----------



## jeffabbyben (Jan 4, 2013)

I received both the Sigma 35 and Canon 35 and tried them both. Unlike Evilted I returned the canon. The canon is a great lens but is not near as sharp as the Sigma. In response to the focus issues I can say that I have never had any problem with my 5DIII and the Sigma. I only use cross type sensors but never had any problem with even non central points. Finally, it IS much heavier than the canon. I did not see any evidence that the canon had better bokeh than the sigma. You will always have varied results with bokeh depending on the background. In addition my understanding is that an aspherical lens (which both lenses are) affects bokeh. Would I buy the sigma again. I have no regrets with my purchase at all and price was not a factor (I am lucky that way). That said at this point I would wait and see if any announcement is made on Jan 8 about a new canon 35mm. I would take other peoples opinions with the same grain of salt you should take mine. It seems like Ray 2021 has an anti sigma agenda and I am not sure he has ever even used one. He even accused us of being sigma "fanboys". : 

I forgot to add I did have to add +8 AFMA to the sigma and 0 to the canon to get the sharpest image.


----------



## Nishi Drew (Jan 4, 2013)

I got this lens, can't be happier for the past week + I've been using it in doors, out doors and around town, portraits or scenery it works perfect the way I expect it to. It has been glued to my 5DII and though weighty, it's balanced very well with the body, no problem for me. Bokeh? Times were it gets interesting, but I like interesting, and it's better than my Canon 50mm 1.4 wide open at least. Sharp sharp sharp all across, I never was big on how sharp a lens was until I started shooting this, oh man, "why even stop down?" I thought, though shallow isn't everything of course :
AF, no problem with the lens, just my 5DII not locking on where there isn't much light or contrast, and so far I havne't gotten a reason to AFMA it, I should try anyways, but haven't had any problems yet.
Now, worth the money? Well, I have no regrets, but I would really say $650~700 would be the killer price.


----------



## Quasimodo (Jan 4, 2013)

eersoy said:


> Hi
> 
> I enjoy portraits of family & friends mostly on my old 450D, and planning to get an indoor portrait lens addition to my EFS 15-85. Does Sigma 35MM F/1.4 DG HSM really worth the price or should I get the cheap EF 40 f/2.8 STM?
> 
> ...



As to answer you question, I would like another person her suggested buy a Canon 50 1.4 given that you have a crop body, hence the 35 and the 40 might be a tad short and also loosing some compression. 

As for the other debate, I am still waiting for the photozone.de review. For once they did not post a review before I got to buy the new Sigma. They are normally quite quick, and I find them very trustworthy, even though I have already bought it  Crossing my fingers that they are not telling me that I have made a stupid purchace.... (have not yet tried it, since I have not returned from the holidays, but come Monday, I have it in my hand


----------



## RS2021 (Jan 4, 2013)

Quasimodo said:


> Crossing my fingers that they are not telling me that I have made a stupid purchace.... (have not yet tried it, since I have not returned from the holidays, but come Monday, I have it in my hand



I am sure photozone will also find that the Sigma is sharp...because it is clear from the pictures the lens *is* sharp ...but as an overall package, I am also interested to hear what they have to say and how the public opinion evolves as more people use it and share their experiences.



jeffabbyben said:


> I have no regrets with my purchase at all and price was not a factor (I am lucky that way). That said at this point I would wait and see if any announcement is made on Jan 8 about a new canon 35mm. I would take other peoples opinions with the same grain of salt you should take mine. It seems like Ray 2021 has an anti sigma agenda and I am not sure he has ever even used one. He even accused us of being sigma "fanboys". :
> 
> I forgot to add I did have to add +8 AFMA to the sigma and 0 to the canon to get the sharpest image.



Perhaps people take what is said really to the extremes. There is not much contest as to Sigma 35's sharpness or that the Canon 35L is showing its age now after 14 years and can stand an update. However, _in addition to sharpness_, one has to consider color rendition, bokeh, AF performance, and contrast and a classic lens such as 35L has presented a coherent package there. 

The Sigma 35 is sharp, yes; but I personally don't like the color palet and the bokeh. I doubt that can be offset by sharpness... These are personal preferences and is not meant to be an indictment on your liking the Sigma. If these other factors that matter to me, don't matter to you, and you love the Sigma, wonderful! Enjoy the lens.


----------



## jeffabbyben (Jan 4, 2013)

Nishi Drew said:


> I got this lens, can't be happier for the past week + I've been using it in doors, out doors and around town, portraits or scenery it works perfect the way I expect it to. It has been glued to my 5DII and though weighty, it's balanced very well with the body, no problem for me. Bokeh? Times were it gets interesting, but I like interesting, and it's better than my Canon 50mm 1.4 wide open at least. Sharp sharp sharp all across, I never was big on how sharp a lens was until I started shooting this, oh man, "why even stop down?" I thought, though shallow isn't everything of course :
> AF, no problem with the lens, just my 5DII not locking on where there isn't much light or contrast, and so far I havne't gotten a reason to AFMA it, I should try anyways, but haven't had any problems yet.
> Now, worth the money? Well, I have no regrets, but I would really say $650~700 would be the killer price.



To re re clarify the sigma was sharp out of the box. I just like to tweak things and did notice a slight improvement at +8. I do agree with sharp , sharp, sharp all across.


----------



## jeffabbyben (Jan 4, 2013)

Ray2021 said:


> Quasimodo said:
> 
> 
> > Crossing my fingers that they are not telling me that I have made a stupid purchace.... (have not yet tried it, since I have not returned from the holidays, but come Monday, I have it in my hand
> ...



Understood Ray. just to clarify for someone considering purchasing this lens the color rendition, bokeh, contrast, and AF certainly do matter to me and comparing both lenses side by side I think the Sigma beat or tied the current canon in every respect. This is my first non canon L glass lens.


----------



## Yehyaalhafidh (Jan 4, 2013)

I recently bought the Canon 35L as I wanted something wider for my trip to Nepal but I didn't want to go for the sigma because it's still a new lens and there could still be some issues that could arise and I wanted something I could rely on!

So far I have absolutely nothing bad to say about the lens, beautiful colors and perfectly contrasty! Snappy and accurate focus too even on my 5D2! Mind you the Sigma does seem ALOT more appealing especially after the weight that's been lifted from my wallet! 

Just thought i'd add my two cents


----------



## crasher8 (Jan 5, 2013)

I sure like the looks of the corners on the DigitalPicture tests


----------



## Hobby Shooter (Jan 6, 2013)

Mikael Risedal said:


> I'm waiting for the Sigma lens and test it out on a d800, Im going on a long work trip in Vietnam,Kambodja and Laos in march and decided to have Nikon gears with me this time instead of Canon. First time since 2006 I will rely on Nikon and maybe also a Sigma 35mm. Compared to Nikon 35/1,4 and Canon 35/1, 4, all tests looks stunning good so far .


Hej, vad ska du hit och göra? Jag bor här nere. Skicka gärna ett meddelande till mig genom forumet här om du vill.


----------



## eyeland (Jan 6, 2013)

Any thoughts on the sealing on the Sigma?
Also, can anyone point me towards a serious forum and/or site that deals with Video DSLR?
I don't really need IS for stills much, but seeing as it can be a KILLER feature for handheld video , I am very interested in the IS performance of the new Sigma as well as the canon lineup and the Tamron 24-70.


----------



## brad-man (Jan 6, 2013)

Mikael Risedal said:


> I'm waiting for the Sigma lens and test it out on a d800, Im going on a long work trip in Vietnam,Kambodja and Laos in march and decided to have Nikon gears with me this time instead of Canon. First time since 2006 I will rely on Nikon and maybe also a Sigma 35mm. Compared to Nikon 35/1,4 and Canon 35/1, 4, all tests looks stunning good so far .



I think you will be impressed by the Sigma. I haven't found a weakness yet. It's sharp across the frame at all aperatures, fast and accurate AF and I haven't even gotten it to flare so far. I think the bokeh issue is silly and subjective. Is March the rainy season? I mention this because the fit and finish of the lens makes it appear to be weather sealed, but, for some reason sigma didn't put a gasket at the lens mount...


----------

