How do you compare SEL35f1.8 OSS vs Sigma 30/2.8 and SEL50f1.8 OSS ?

Discussion in 'Sony Alpha E-Mount Lenses' started by Amamba, Oct 28, 2013.

  1. Amamba

    Amamba TalkEmount All-Pro

    Apr 13, 2013
    SE MI
    I have the Sigma and the 50mm.

    Sigma is a great, sharp, cheap lens with reasonably fast AF. However the color, while good, isn't as good (to my eyes) as the 50. To me, Sigma tends to produce colors that are a bit on the blue / colder side. Same goes for the 19. This is not a fault, but rather the characteristic of this lens.

    The difference is most visible on the inside. On the outside, especially in bright light, the 50 has very different colors than on the inside. In bright light, it's just another sharp prime. But there's an amazing transformation when using 50 in subdued (not poor) light, especially when there's lots of color around. It just renders everything beautifully crisp with very rich, vibrant but not oversaturated colors. The big bummer however is the AF speed, especially in dim light.

    So, if you have experience with all three lenses, where do you think the 35/1.8 fits in ? Optically, is it close to / same as 50 ? How does it render colors ? And how fast is the AF ?

    It's hard for me to justify getting 35 vs 30 - there's a huge difference in price (especially since I got 30 as a part of the 2 lenses for $200 deal at B&H), the 30 is a great lens in it's own right, and 35 is getting a bit too long, I'd rather have 28... but if it gives me all the sharpness and color rendering of 50, with faster AF in low light, and with better bokeh than 30, plus OSS... it may be worth it.
     
  2. quezra

    quezra TalkEmount Top Veteran

    916
    Aug 22, 2012
    I've had all 3 but at different times - they all have advantages and disadvantages, but sharpness wise they are very similar (i.e. all very good)

    The 50 hunts more than the 35 and 30 in my experience, but it does occupy a focal length that neither of the other 2 can duplicate and is really good as the portrait length. The 35 is easily the 'one-size-fits-all' option and great for sticking onto your camera and forgetting about it, it is just simply the most versatile. The Sigma 30 is the best bang for buck and probably (just) edges the other two in sharpness. It beats its wider cousin, the 19mm, at sharpness wide open too. Of course it isn't as fast and arguably has worse bokeh, but for an all-rounder, 30mm focal length is to me more useful than 35mm.
     
  3. serhan

    serhan TalkEmount All-Pro

    Aug 27, 2011
    NYC
  4. Amamba

    Amamba TalkEmount All-Pro

    Apr 13, 2013
    SE MI
    The low light to me is important, but equally important is the color. Hard to judge by sample photos as they are usually processed. Again, I like the 30 and think it's an awesome lens, but there's just something special about the color on 50 under certain lighting conditions.
     
  5. Deadbear77

    Deadbear77 TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Sep 14, 2012
    Northeast Ohio
    Kevin
    The 50 is great, except for focusing. I can focus a lot quicker with my legacy glass, other than that, the OSS is nice to have in low light.

    I also have the sel24 sel35 sig30 and the 50.

    IQ is pretty much the same in all 4, sigma again has a slightly different color cast and the zeiss is an animal of its own, it may not be as sharp but produces almost fairy tale image quality in low light settings.

    If it's a indoor battle the sigma should stay outside. 2.8 is fast but not that fast without the OSS.

    The zeiss has no OSS but the focal length kinda makes up for it.

    I shot a wedding recently with the 24 and the 50. The 50 worked great even though I shot manual focus most of the time.

    Again sorry I got off topic but if you want that 30/35mm focal length go with the 35 if your shooting indoor most of the time.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  6. serhan

    serhan TalkEmount All-Pro

    Aug 27, 2011
    NYC
  7. Amamba

    Amamba TalkEmount All-Pro

    Apr 13, 2013
    SE MI
    Thanks. I guess I am more interested to know how it compares to the two lenses I already own. I.e. am I going to see any real optical advantage going from Sigma 30 to Sony 35 ? By that I mean better colors, same or better sharpness, and bokeh.
     
  8. Deadbear77

    Deadbear77 TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Sep 14, 2012
    Northeast Ohio
    Kevin
    Boke yes, colors maybe and sharpness not till after 4.0


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  9. Bill

    Bill TalkEmount Veteran

    339
    Oct 22, 2012
    Brisbane, Australia
    Bill
    Love the 35mm

    I have the Sony 35mm and 50mm, but not the Sigma 30. (I have the Sigma 60mm, but that's another matter.)

    I find that I always come back to that "sturdy 30" range. The Sony is a great lens. It doesn't have the colour of the Touit 32mm, but it's close on the resolution. It's the OSS that makes the 35 my carry around lens. The 50 is great and I keep telling myself that I should use it more, but if I go longer than the 35, it's usually to the 60. Here are a couple of Sony 35s:

    Bill_Danby20130724_botanic_0022.


    Bill_Danby20130815_NOL_0143.