Sigma 1.4 or Nikon 35 1.8 FX

AdamNZ

AdamNZ

Suspended / Banned
Messages
394
Name
Adam
Edit My Images
Yes
So anyone have any experience with the Sigma 35 1.4 or the Nikon 35 1.8 FX? Hard decision here. Interested to know peoples' views on the image quality difference between the two and whether the sigma is that much better in real world shooting as to warrant the weight and price jump from the Nikon. I want a 35 as my general all purpose lens for shooting people, street, travel and events in combination with my 85. Camera body is the D750. Thanks
 
Not much in it really from an IQ point of view, depends on whether you want to gain a small bit of speed for the added weight and build.

Personally, I'd get the Nikon and given your stated uses I reckon it would be better for you.
 
I have both I was given the Nikon 35mm as part exchange against another lens I sold. I was going to sell it on but its a very nice lens and tbh I think is probably a better fit for the D750 just in terms of physical size etc. In terms of image quality the Sigma is better but the differences aren't huge and my wife definitely prefers the Nikon, she pretty much never uses anything else which is why I decided to keep it rather than selling it on. The Sigma does have a bit of a rep for needing a lot of a.f adjustment but mine needed less than the nIkon. Both are good, the Sigma is very good no matter which one you buy I am sure you will be happy with it.
 
How does the Sigma perform on Nikon bodies AF-wise? That's the thing that ultimately put me off when I went through a similar dilemma but vs the Canon 35L. I ended up with the Canon as I'd read too many horror stories about the Sigma's inconsistent AF. Worth doing a bit of research to see what people's experiences have been with your particular body and the 35A!
 
harryduns said:
How does the Sigma perform on Nikon bodies AF-wise? That's the thing that ultimately put me off when I went through a similar dilemma but vs the Canon 35L. I ended up with the Canon as I'd read too many horror stories about the Sigma's inconsistent AF. Worth doing a bit of research to see what people's experiences have been with your particular body and the 35A!
Click to expand...

Fine on my D750, I think you need to take what people say on the web with a pinch of salt, a lot of reviewers rate the lens faster and more accurate than the more expensive 35L and the Nikkor 1.4, there are also a lot of people who arent used to shooting fast lenses so confuse their own lack of ability or lens limitations with actual issues.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OuN1ywuufg
 
Last edited:
twist said:
a lot of reviewers rate the lens faster and more accurate than the more expensive 35L and the Nikkor 1.4
Click to expand...

A lot of lens reviewers don't test lenses in more challenging real world situations (dark and artificially lit rooms, low ambient light etc), and these are the places where people are reporting the most issues. Showing how sharp a lens is under controlled studio tests is also to be taken with a massive pinch of salt! ;)

I'm not sure it's a case of newbies finding the shallow DOF of a fast lens too hard to handle either, as I've seen lots of people who have said they had used the 35L for years, were ready to switch to the Sigma because of its surperior optics, but ultimately didn't due to its inconsistencies. If it was just one or two I'd be dubious, but there are too many people reporting the same issues for it simply to be false rumours from clueless people, IMHO.

Ultimately, it's the OP's choice, just thought he should be aware of what others have reported. I'd suggest that if you do go with the Sigma then make sure you buy from a reputable seller who will be easy to return it to if you do have issues, and make sure you test the hell out of it whilst still within the returns period!
 
harryduns said:
A lot of lens reviewers don't test lenses in more challenging real world situations (dark and artificially lit rooms, low ambient light etc), and these are the places where people are reporting the most issues. Showing how sharp a lens is under controlled studio tests is also to be taken with a massive pinch of salt! ;)

I'm not sure it's a case of newbies finding the shallow DOF of a fast lens too hard to handle either, as I've seen lots of people who have said they had used the 35L for years, were ready to switch to the Sigma because of its surperior optics, but ultimately didn't due to its inconsistencies. If it was just one or two I'd be dubious, but there are too many people reporting the same issues for it simply to be false rumours from clueless people, IMHO.

Ultimately, it's the OP's choice, just thought he should be aware of what others have reported. I'd suggest that if you do go with the Sigma then make sure you buy from a reputable seller who will be easy to return it to if you do have issues, and make sure you test the hell out of it whilst still within the returns period!
Click to expand...

I must just be lucky then, mine works fine in low light, but I am using a Nikon :p

Type Canon 35mm 1.4 focus issues into google and have a look at the results, same thing, Sigmas QC is far from perfect and Ive had major issues with their lenses in the past but when someone releases a lens this good Ill sing its praises.

Id also recommend he does the same thing, but that applies to all fast primes. OP Dont forget the Sigma comes with 3 years warranty and you can buy the dock to tweak the focus as much as you like, which could also be useful for future lenses. Good luck with whatever you go for.
 
Googling 'canon 35 1.4 focus reliability' actually returns mainly pages about problems with the Sigma even though I didn't use the word :p Try it yourself if you don't believe me! Anyhow, I'm neither a Canon fanboy nor a Sigma hater, I own lenses by both manufacturers :) Just thought since nobody else had mentioned it, it was worth noting.
 
harryduns said:
Googling 'canon 35 1.4 focus reliability' actually returns mainly pages about problems with the Sigma even though I didn't use the word :p Try it yourself if you don't believe me! Anyhow, I'm neither a Canon fanboy nor a Sigma hater, I own lenses by both manufacturers :) Just thought since nobody else had mentioned it, it was worth noting.
Click to expand...

Nope, it returns results for both, fwiw sigma lenses have more issues with canon cameras.
 
harryduns said:
How does the Sigma perform on Nikon bodies AF-wise? That's the thing that ultimately put me off when I went through a similar dilemma but vs the Canon 35L. I ended up with the Canon as I'd read too many horror stories about the Sigma's inconsistent AF. Worth doing a bit of research to see what people's experiences have been with your particular body and the 35A!
Click to expand...

As I mentioned above I have both, the Sigma needed less tuning to be perfect on all 4 of my camera bodies than the Nikon version did. That was on a D4S, D800, D750 and D700.
 
It's worth checking which version of the firmware the sigma lens has (you can update it easily with the USB dock) - my Sigma 35mm 1.4 was blindingly sharp on my D700 straight out of the box. I put it on my new D810 the other day and found the autofocus was way out, and it wouldn't even autofocus in live view. It just needed the firmware updating for the newer body which took about 2 minutes - it's now just as awesome on the D810 as it was on the D700.
 
The AF on the Sigma is excellent, much like everything else about the lens. As mentioned above, to get the best out of it the firmware needs to be updated and you need to know how to fine tune the AF on your camera. It's a far better lens than the Nikon 35mm 1.4 which I had before it, but that is just my opinion of course (before I get flamed by the 3rd party manufacturer haters!).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top