Sony FE 35mm F1.8 vs. Sigma FE 35mm F1.4

Which Prime Lens will you prefer in FE 35mm category

  • Sony FE 35mm F1.8

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Sigma FE 35mm F1.4

    Votes: 3 100.0%

  • Sony / Sigma 24 to 70 mm F 2.8

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    3
Status
Not open for further replies.
princeoo7

princeoo7

On a Journey called Life :P
Keymaster
Well I am thinking to get the Prime lens for and am so confused now.
I know Sony FE 35mm F1.4 GM is the best, compact and out of the world lens but don't have a budget of 1.42L to buy it as of now.

So was thinking of getting something which don't cost a bomb :P

so the option I have are:
1) Sony FE 35mm F1.8 - native lens at 52K or something ( not a GM lens ).
2) Sigma FE 35mm F1.4 - 3rd party lens for 68K something.

also How much difference does a variable lens will make i.e. 24 to 70 mm F 2.8 in comparison to above lens. I Know that the bokeh effect will be less. what else will be the differences ?
 
Recent releases of Sigma Zoom lens (variable lens in your terms) have pretty close sharpness and overall quality to that of prime lens. Between F1.4/1.8 and F2.8, apart from bokeh not being that creamy, you would loose out taking pictures in low light - not that you would be able to shoot in dark but say time after sunset where F2.8 would struggle, F1.4 will sail through.

In general, not being a Sigma fanboy, I have observed that Sigma quality is very close to Sony native lens at say half of cost (not half every-time :p ) !

I moved from Sony 16-55G F2.8 to Sigma 18-50 F2.8; yeah I lost 5mm on tele end and 2mm on wide end. But overall quality, autofocus, etc is nearly same ! Sigma costs half, weighs half and compact.

Check Arthur R on YouTube.
 
vyral_143 said:
Recent releases of Sigma Zoom lens (variable lens in your terms) have pretty close sharpness and overall quality to that of prime lens. Between F1.4/1.8 and F2.8, apart from bokeh not being that creamy, you would loose out taking pictures in low light - not that you would be able to shoot in dark but say time after sunset where F2.8 would struggle, F1.4 will sail through.

In general, not being a Sigma fanboy, I have observed that Sigma quality is very close to Sony native lens at say half of cost (not half every-time :p ) !

I moved from Sony 16-55G F2.8 to Sigma 18-50 F2.8; yeah I lost 5mm on tele end and 2mm on wide end. But overall quality, autofocus, etc is nearly same ! Sigma costs half, weighs half and compact.

Check Arthur R on YouTube.
Click to expand...
Sigma is only slow in AF and is bulky in compared to Sony Gm 35mm f1.4. reset its same. But now sony 35mm F 1.8 comes for less price so I am so confused :/

also how will my Sony 28-75mm F3.5 to 5.6 perform against the 24to70mm 2.8 lens.
 
booo said:
Very poorly.

If you don’t mind manual focus lenses, look into voigtlaender.

E-Mount | Voigtländer

www.voigtlaender.de www.voigtlaender.de
Click to expand...
I went for Sony for just that Auto Focus :angelic:
Sony ZV-E10 and Sony A6400 are back in stock but I wont be getting them and will spend that money on a lens. Now the lens I liked is GM lens and cost a bomb. What an Luck I got.
vyral_143 said:
A lot different - you are comparing F2.8 constant aperture with kit lens !
Click to expand...
Is their a 16mm F1.4 for Full Frame ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom