Sigma 35 1.4 or Canon 50 1.4 or Canon 24-70 2.8 II

[joaopedroglm]

Hello Guys,

I`m in the process of choosing my next lens, i Have 3 options:
Sigma 35 1.4
Canon 50 1.4
Canon 24-70 2.8 II

The propose of the lens is for street photography and portraits. I prefer lens with some wide capability, that can give me versatility and the possibility of larger compositions. My main concern is Image Quality.

Can you give me your thoughts.

Thanks

[Niterider]

Are you using a full frame or crop body camera?

Either way, I would go with the sigma 35mm 1.4. There is no question about image quality for that lens. The street photographers I know like the canon 40mm pancake lens because of how discrete it is. On the other hand, if you are carrying a 24-70 mkii, everyone knows your there.

If you are really looking for versatility, the canon 24-70 mkii is exceptional IQ for a zoom lens in its focal range. The trade off is the the convenience of zooming vs marginally better IQ and much more versatility in terms of depth of field.

[joaopedroglm]

I`m using a full frame

Thanks

[BrandonKing96]

Out of your options, I wouldn't consider the 50 f/1.4.  Both the Sigma 35 and Canon 24-70 II are superior to it.  If you want to be a little discrete I'd use the sigma 35 (and that f/1.4 aperture would be really nice for street photography), but if you want the versatility of a very sharp zoom, I'd go for the 24-70 II and in my opinion the 24-70 II isn't really that big.  I used it whilst walking around the city and I felt comfortable with it and didn't get too many stares (aside from the ones admiring the fact I owned a 24-70 II)

[RLPhoto]

50mm 1.4 is cheap as chips and is decent for the $$$. I'd recommend it for is neutral perspective.

[RS2021]

50mm 1.4 is cheap as chips and is decent for the $$$. I'd recommend it for is neutral perspective.

+1

[EvilTed]

I have both the 24-70 F/2.8 II and the Sigma 35mm F/1.4, so maybe I can answer

For IQ, there isn't a lot in it. Both are as sharp as I've seen from a Canon lens. The Sigma has a rose-tinted spectacles look, more reminiscent of a Zeiss lens.

The Sigma is better for low light and gives better bokeh @ F/1.4 but with some vignetting.

The 5D MK3, 1D-X and 6D have in-camera lens correction. The Sigma does not. There is no Lightroom profile for it yet either.

The Canon is more versatile and has faster and more reliable AF and is weather sealed.
The Sigma has some front focusing issues and probably needs Micro Adjustment.

I don't think I'd use either for street photography because they are both big and heavy (but I don't use my 5D MK3 for street anyway).

I'd probably get the Canon 35mm IS for that purpose because it's made for hand holding and you probably won't be shooting street photography in the dark anyway

If I had to choose between them, I'd say get the Canon.

ET

[eml58]

In December 2012 I spent a week in Tokyo, decided on this trip to concentrate on something I'de really never tried much of, "Street Photography", I had a brand new Sigma f1.4, Canon 50f/1.2, Canon 135f/2 & the Canon 24-70f/2.8 II, all these Lenses at times were remarkable when shot on the 5DMKIII, When I looked later at the Photos taken I was unable to tell which Lens took what photo, but the Lens that impressed me most, and was the Lens used for 50% of the Tokyo Photos, was the Sigma 35f/1.4 (Strangely I've never owned the Canon 35f/1.4 so cant compare).

Although it's been mentioned that the Sigma 35 might have a slight IQ advantage I didn't find this to be the case, all these Lenses have remarkably good IQ, but the f/1.4 combined with the 35 focal length makes this almost the "Perfect" street Photography Lens I thought, albeit these are the opinions from someone that's generally more at home shooting the 600f/4 on the 1Dx and pointing at Leopards or Lions and the only people around are part of the Menu.

The least used of the 4 was the 50f/1.2 & 135f/2, again both are amazing Lenses for this sort of Photography but I often found 50mm & particularly 135 were to long as a fixed focal length, although I suspect this was more about me & my lack of experience in this "People" environment than about the Lens, usually the case.

[Mt Spokane Photography]

With a FF camera and a 35mm lens, to fill the frame with a person, you need to be pretty close.  Picking a lens for the best quality image rather than the correct focal length is not going to give you the best IQ if you have to crop most of it away.
If you have a zoom, look at images you like and check the focal length.
 
This image with my 35mmL was about 5-7 ft away, pretty close.
 

 
 

[wayno]

I'd probably vote for the 50 1.4 or the 24-70 ii. The latter very versatile and the 50 is small and reasonably discreet. I find my 35 a bit too close for street photography but I do love it's all round focal length for posing and close candids. All three are good choices really and all with wildly different budgetary issues.

[joaopedroglm]

Thanks Guys.

My main "dislike" about he 50mm is that i`going to Marocco and the streets are narrow and dark, so the focal length of the 50mm could be to tight, that`s why i was thinking more on the 35mm. I like the versatility of the 24-70 but my main question is if the 2.8 is enough.

[Dylan777]

If money is not an issue then it's almost a no brainer decision - 24-70 f2.8 II.

[dave]

+1 on the 24-70 ii. It is stunning and in alleyways, markets and the like the zoom will be useful.

I am sure the Sigma is great, but as a walk around I find the 24-70 ii unsurpassed.

[Nishi Drew]

I'd probably vote for the 50 1.4 or the 24-70 ii. The latter very versatile and the 50 is small and reasonably discreet. I find my 35 a bit too close for street photography but I do love it's all round focal length for posing and close candids. All three are good choices really and all with wildly different budgetary issues.

I like the 50mm FOV but intentionally chose the 35mm so I WOULD get closer, as close is good when it comes to street photos, especially candids, and for general shots it's a lot easier to work with. Go F/1.4 and with that wide perspective it gives an unbeatable feel, where the 50 is close but it's normal looking and often too shallow. Although Canon's 50mm 1.4 isn't something I want to play with anymore, especially wide open, at F/2.0 it can manage but that thing flares and messes up the picture in ways my Siggy 35 laughs at wide open~

That said, my recent walk around in Kyoto left me wanting a 24-70 for it's versatility, but being able to shoot 2 stops faster cures me of that desire every time (although I had a 70-200 with me as well...

[Quasimodo]

If money is not an issue then it's almost a no brainer decision - 24-70 f2.8 II.

+ 1.

You loose some aperture, but you gain a more versatile lens which according to many reviews is unsurpassed in IQ. I used it last year in june, and I loved it (unfortunately just for loan, but one day it will be mine.... which is the same time I am selling my 24-105), but I am on the other side not qualified to make statements as to whether it is so and so good. I have the 50 1.4, and it is less than a year and a half old, and it has already been to the shop for repair because of the AF. The Sigma is great and I love it, although I am getting a strange greenish cast of some of the shots I took in studio with it, so I will have to figure out if it is my fault, the strobes and a flare issue, or if it is the lens before I can recomend it.