Nikkor 35mm F1.8 or Sigma 30mm F1.4?


xDreamerZ

New Member
May 3, 2011
94
0
0
24
Disney!
#1
I have been reading up on both lenses and the debates between which is slightly better etc. But now, i still can't decide which lens should i go for. Could your kindly share some experience of both lenses? If I am buying the Sigma lens, it would be a grey set @ $500, while the original Nikkor lens @ $350.
Thanks!
 

Omega23

New Member
Mar 12, 2009
1,074
0
0
#2
Both are different class of lens.. If u manage to get a sharp copy of the sigma30mm it will prawn the 35mm deep deep.
 

rijac

New Member
Mar 27, 2007
276
0
0
48
#3
for the price of the sigma i'd go for the 35mm f2. unless u need the af-s.
 

rijac

New Member
Mar 27, 2007
276
0
0
48
#5
i think the f2 has better IQ, no?
 

rijac

New Member
Mar 27, 2007
276
0
0
48
#8
hmm.... i have the 1.8 and no doubt its a great lens at the price point was actually thinking of selling to get the f2 based on my impression it was slightly better.... will have to rethink that now!
 

daredevil123

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 25, 2005
21,657
68
48
lil red dot
#9
hmm.... i have the 1.8 and no doubt its a great lens at the price point was actually thinking of selling to get the f2 based on my impression it was slightly better.... will have to rethink that now!
It is a good buy if you intend to move to full frame in the near future
 

alantkh

Deregistered
Jun 16, 2009
786
0
0
42
#10
It is a good buy if you intend to move to full frame in the near future
I had the 35mm f/2 for FF. I think it sucks on FF. Nikon really should have updated the 35mm f/2... The new f1.4 is extremely expensive and has pretty high CA (normal for f1.4 lens). I mean the 35mm f1.4G lens cost like 2.1k in singapore. It is a 35mm prime.... How much the old 35mm f/2 cost? If only they have a 35mm f/2 lens for around $600-800.
 

bigpond

Senior Member
Feb 12, 2008
594
0
16
33
#11
I had the 35mm f/2 for FF. I think it sucks on FF. Nikon really should have updated the 35mm f/2... The new f1.4 is extremely expensive and has pretty high CA (normal for f1.4 lens). I mean the 35mm f1.4G lens cost like 2.1k in singapore.
I totally agree. The 35 f2D lens on FF has issues -- it is soft at f2 (even in the centre) and the edges do not sharpen up until like f5.6 or so. Not a bad lens for some applications, but optically not great.

In fact, I rather use the 35/1.8G DX lens on FF D700 even though there is slight vignetting at certain settings. Nonetheless, it is usable on FX and the optical performance is simply better than the old 35 f2D. Cheap and good, just like the 50 1.8G.

If you don't mind MF, a good option in between the Nikon 35/2 and 35/1.4G would be the Zeiss ZF 35/2. This is a fantastic piece of glass and engineering. Sharp wide open and contrasty. Awesome.
 

kenaz

New Member
Nov 2, 2006
1,073
0
0
#14
ZerocoolAstra said:
:devil: 35/1.8DX :devil:

I'm pretty sure it's not $350 ;)
Yeah.. Definitely lower for a brand new one.

Anyway I would prefer sigma 30mm if you can get a sharp copy. I owned N35f1.8, S30f1.4 and S50f1.4. Now I only keep the S50f1.4. Bokeh wise, sigma tends to be more smooth and clean. Sharpness wise, N35 will be better at corners, center not much of a different.

Why I kept the S50 is becos it performs very well with both dx and fx(d90/d700). I like the reach on dx, very good for portrait with minimal distortion(not really visible). On fx, it's good for environmental portrait. You might need to step back a little but it shld work fine. And most imptly, to me, it has 77mm Filter thread. Most of my filters, adapter ring is 77mm. And it makes a noob(me) looks pro! And that's impt... :D
 

Aug 23, 2004
371
3
18
North
#15
I second that, prefer the Sigma 30mm provide u sent it with ur body for calibration.
 

cichlid

Senior Member
Dec 2, 2006
5,072
3
38
S'pore
#16
I bought the 35mm f1.8 as it is sharp, cheaper and does not have focusing issue; sold it away when i bought D700.

Although, the Sigma is very desirable, the higher price and worries of focusing issues put me off.

After I bought the Nikon, I enjoyed it so much that I didn't think of the Sigma any more. Hope this help in your decision making.

Edit: I bought the Samyang 35mm f1.4 manual lens recently. The first copy of the lens was horrible, I couldnt get sharp shots and the focusing was way off. What I'm trying to say is, if your lens can't focus properly, you will feel very frustrated! The 2nd copy is perfect though.
 

Last edited:

dardar

New Member
Oct 6, 2010
168
0
0
#17
maybe u should think of the purpose for the lens. if u want a light walkabout lens and low good low light capability then just get 35mm 1.8. if u want it for Bokeh then go for sigma. but i feel 50mm is the way to go for bokeh
 

daredevil123

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 25, 2005
21,657
68
48
lil red dot
#19
I had the 35mm f/2 for FF. I think it sucks on FF. Nikon really should have updated the 35mm f/2... The new f1.4 is extremely expensive and has pretty high CA (normal for f1.4 lens). I mean the 35mm f1.4G lens cost like 2.1k in singapore. It is a 35mm prime.... How much the old 35mm f/2 cost? If only they have a 35mm f/2 lens for around $600-800.
I didn't say it is good. Just that it is a good buy ;)

the AFD cost around 400+ nowadays. And if you know where to look, sometimes can get below 400.

You can always go Canon... ;) they offer good options in terms of lenses. ;P
 

Last edited:
Top Bottom