Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 24, 2010, 4:49 PM   #31
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

The canon 28mm 1.8 stop down to 2.8 to 3.5 is very sharp. Comparing that to the kit lens in the same range the prime is sharper. To get the zoom to the sharpness of the prime I have to stop down to about 8-11 to get the 2.8-3.5 results with the prime.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.

Last edited by shoturtle; Apr 24, 2010 at 5:34 PM.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2010, 5:35 PM   #32
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

The Canon 35mm f/2.0 is the sharpest of the ones you mentioned, even when it's wide open and the others are stopped down to f/2.0. Plus the Sigmas have a lot of vignetting and the other Canon has a lot of chromatic aberration.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2010, 5:36 PM   #33
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.P View Post
Out of interest, for other photographs; family, travel etc. in more normal light, would the 28mm or 30mm lenses be noticeably sharper than the kit zoom?
The Canon 35/2? Without question.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2010, 5:47 PM   #34
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

Tcav,

We are talking about the sigma 35 1.4 not the canon 35 1.4L. Do not think the OP is looking for a 1400 dollar lens.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2010, 6:12 PM   #35
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 16
Default

Hang on - I'm confused -
there is a canon EF 35mm f2 on amazon for about 264.
Also Sigma 30mm f1.4 for 348
and Canon EF 28mm f1.8 for 457
and Sigma 28mm f 1.8 for 285

Are these the lenses we are talking about?
The angle of any of these would be OK for me, which is the best for sharpness and colour at f2?
Mr.P is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2010, 6:29 PM   #36
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

The EF 35 f2 is an older lens, and it is not as good as the sigma or canon 28mm f1.8. The ef 35 f2 has some hunting issues in low light like the ef 24 f2.8 , ef 28 f2.8 and the ef 50 f1.8. These are canon's low end primes. They do not focus as fast as the ef 28mm 1.8 with the USM motor. And for low light shooting the faster AF speed and better AF focus system will give you much better results.

The low end primes are good, but the higher tier lenses like the ef 28 f1.8 USM ef 20 f2.8 USM, ef 50 1.4 USM, ef 85 f1.8 USM and ef 100 f2.0 USM are better lenses in low light and are a bit sharper then the entry level primes.

The sigma prime are also very good like the 20, 24, and 28, they do not focus as fast as the 30, 35, 50 as they do not has the hsm motor like the 30, 35 and 50.

PS

The canon ef 28 1.8 USM would be sharper at f2 then the canon ef 35 f2 at f2, not sure about the sigma. I have not shot them.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.

Last edited by shoturtle; Apr 24, 2010 at 6:32 PM. Reason: post script
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2010, 7:41 PM   #37
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I'd go with the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 unless you have plans to go with a full frame camera later (Canon EOS-5D Mark II, etc.), since it's designed for an APS-C size sensor.

Here's a comparison of the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 with the Canon 35mm f/2 by Lightrules (a.k.a., fstopjojo), and you'll also see a link at the top of the album page to another comparison between those lenses):

http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/30v35

Here's one with the Canon 28mm f/1.8

http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/28v30
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2010, 7:49 PM   #38
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx

Seems to be a very good lens and the price reflexes it.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2010, 8:26 PM   #39
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shoturtle View Post
Tcav,

We are talking about the sigma 35 1.4 not the canon 35 1.4L. Do not think the OP is looking for a 1400 dollar lens.
I'm talking about the Canon 35mm f/2.0 (~$330.)

According to SLRGear.com, the Canon EF 35mm f/2, wide open, has less vignetting and is sharper than the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM at f/2.0, and it's sharper and has less chromatic aberration than the Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM at f/2.0.

And autofocus speed doesn't matter. Mr. P is going to mount it on a tripod, focus on the stage, and switch to manual focus.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.

Last edited by TCav; Apr 24, 2010 at 8:35 PM.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 25, 2010, 1:17 AM   #40
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

I had the ef 35mm f2. And for low light it is a bit of a pain. Even if you shoot on a tripod, you still need it to AF lock. That is one of the reason I did not keep that lens. I shoot allot of low light and night shots. And the ef 35 f2 was not great because of the AF issue. Having the lens reset to infinity constantly was a bit annoying as it restarted the AF cycle. Also the ef 35mm f2.0 is not the most accurate when it comes to Autofocus, the OOF lock is magnified when put into low light situations. You will get more OOF locks with it, where the higher end primes will give you much better AF accuracy. So if the OP is trying to capture one particular moment of the play and the AF fail to lock or lock OOF because of the lens, it would be a bit annoying. But for daylight and good lighting situation, the lens is pretty good, especially for the price.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.

Last edited by shoturtle; Apr 25, 2010 at 1:36 AM. Reason: typo
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:06 PM.