Which prime lens would be your pick in the 28-35mm range?

Started Apr 23, 2013 | Discussions
FChris180
New MemberPosts: 17
Like?
Which prime lens would be your pick in the 28-35mm range?
Apr 23, 2013

Hallo, I am looking for a prime lens in the 28-35mm range for my Canon 6d  as a walk-around for reportage and landscape work (I would also like to include the Zeiss distagon 25mm f2 in the list even if it's a bit too much on the wide side).

I was looking into Canon, Sigma and Zeiss (no AF is not a major issue and I am aware of field curvature with some lenses as the Zeiss 28mm f2).

Canon 28/2.8 IS

Canon 35/2 IS

Sigma 35/1.4

Zeiss distagon 28/2 or 35/2 (in case even the 25/2)

Which would be your personal choice?

Do you think that the new IS prime lenses from Canon - 28mm IS and 35mm IS - together with the Sigma 35mm 1.4 can provide a quite similar micro-contrast and rendition as the Zeiss lenses?

Thanks in advance for sharing your opinion,

Chris

Canon EOS 6D
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
Collett
Senior MemberPosts: 4,998
Like?
Re: Which prime lens would be your pick in the 28-35mm range?
In reply to FChris180, Apr 23, 2013

FChris180 wrote:

Hallo, I am looking for a prime lens in the 28-35mm range for my Canon 6d  as a walk-around for reportage and landscape work (I would also like to include the Zeiss distagon 25mm f2 in the list even if it's a bit too much on the wide side).

I was looking into Canon, Sigma and Zeiss (no AF is not a major issue and I am aware of field curvature with some lenses as the Zeiss 28mm f2).

Canon 28/2.8 IS

Canon 35/2 IS

Sigma 35/1.4

Zeiss distagon 28/2 or 35/2 (in case even the 25/2)

Which would be your personal choice?

Do you think that the new IS prime lenses from Canon - 28mm IS and 35mm IS - together with the Sigma 35mm 1.4 can provide a quite similar micro-contrast and rendition as the Zeiss lenses?

Thanks in advance for sharing your opinion,

I own the Zeiss 28F2, Sigma 35F1.4 Art, and Canon 24F2.8IS.  They are all fantastic optically.  For me personally, I will eventually sell the Zeiss 28 because my inability to get critical focus on manual can be an issue that negates the fantastic optics of the lens and ii) its kinds a bulky and heavy lens and I much prefer the Canon 24F2.8IS.

The Canon 24IS, and the 28IS I imagine as well, makes a great walk around because it is so light.  Also, the IS is nice for landscape photography and for travel. Here are a few shots:

I would highly recommend the Sigma 23F1.4 Art.  Very sharp wide open, even in the corners and great contrast and no issues with AF.  I find it to be like a baby Zeiss in build quality, and with AF to boot! Here are a few shots:

Chris

-- hide signature --

Jim

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
FChris180
New MemberPosts: 17
Like?
Re: Which prime lens would be your pick in the 28-35mm range?
In reply to Collett, Apr 23, 2013

Hi Jim,

thanks for your reply and sharing your nice shots. These are very good examples of what these lenses can deliver.

Did you find hard to use hyperfocal with the Zeiss?

Since you owned all the three lenses, I am really curious about the micro-contrast or "3d" feeling of both Canon 24mm IS and Sigma 35mm vs Zeiss; do they get any close?

Chris

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Gunzorro
Senior MemberPosts: 1,888
Like?
Re: Which prime lens would be your pick in the 28-35mm range?
In reply to FChris180, Apr 23, 2013

Canon EF 35/2 IS is my choice.

I don't care about how it compares to Zeiss or Sigma, since neither of those brands had the feature set I want: IS and AF in a relatively compact lightweight package.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Collett
Senior MemberPosts: 4,998
Like?
Re: Which prime lens would be your pick in the 28-35mm range?
In reply to FChris180, Apr 23, 2013

FChris180 wrote:

Hi Jim,

thanks for your reply and sharing your nice shots. These are very good examples of what these lenses can deliver.

Did you find hard to use hyperfocal with the Zeiss?

The manual Zeiss is great for landscape photography, but I did not like it for people because I have kids and they move around a lot.  So actually I prefer the Zeiss if one is just doing hard core landscape photography on a tripod and is concerned about corner to corner sharpness, but the Canon is my choice for people shots and where weight matters.

Since you owned all the three lenses, I am really curious about the micro-contrast or "3d" feeling of both Canon 24mm IS and Sigma 35mm vs Zeiss; do they get any close?

You know I never personally found anything special like the 3d rendering many claim with Zeiss, but that just may be me.  I was very impressed with the Canon micro contrast and found the same thing with the 40mm pancake I bought recently.  It seems to me the coatings they are using now are almost L quality in terms of output - better contrast, micro contrast, saturation, flare resistance than some of my older non-L primes.

I cannot really tell the difference between the Zeiss and the Sigma or new Canon's in this regard and as I said when shooting people the disadvantage of manual focus outweighs the lenses advantages for me..

Chris

-- hide signature --

Jim

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
rsn48
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,130
Like?
If for reportage work...
In reply to FChris180, Apr 23, 2013

IF for reportage work, its possible you might need a fast lens, then consider the new and excellent Sigma 35mm f1.4; before you dismiss it research the reviews on it.

I shoot wineries which is landscape and for that, I often use much longer focal ranges than the traditional wide angle, as do many landscapers.  I found looking at my Exif data, many were taken at 28mm.

Photographed at 130mm range.

Mission Hill winery.  Go through my collection I find the majority shot at 28mm.

Photographed at 60mm range.

-- hide signature --

Hindsight is better than foresight, except for lost opportunity costs.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
FChris180
New MemberPosts: 17
Like?
Re: If for reportage work...
In reply to rsn48, Apr 24, 2013

Thanks for your insight. I think that 28mm is a well balanced focal length that can cover both landscape and reportage work.. these lenses are all very tempting - including the Sigma -

C

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
rebel99
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,068
Like?
Re: Which prime lens would be your pick in the 28-35mm range?
In reply to FChris180, Apr 24, 2013

FChris180 wrote:

Hallo, I am looking for a prime lens in the 28-35mm range for my Canon 6d  as a walk-around for reportage and landscape work (I would also like to include the Zeiss distagon 25mm f2 in the list even if it's a bit too much on the wide side).

I was looking into Canon, Sigma and Zeiss (no AF is not a major issue and I am aware of field curvature with some lenses as the Zeiss 28mm f2).

Canon 28/2.8 IS

Canon 35/2 IS

Sigma 35/1.4

Zeiss distagon 28/2 or 35/2 (in case even the 25/2)

Which would be your personal choice?

Do you think that the new IS prime lenses from Canon - 28mm IS and 35mm IS - together with the Sigma 35mm 1.4 can provide a quite similar micro-contrast and rendition as the Zeiss lenses?

Thanks in advance for sharing your opinion,

Chris

i don't have any experience with the lenses you have mentioned above but i do own the canon 24mm f1.4II, tse 17mm/tse 24mm, 35mm f1.4 and zeiss 21mm 2.8 distagon, i have to say that the zeiss optic is the best of all of them. the canon tse17mm/tse 24mm come very close in IQ. i don't find having IS very critical in UW lenses.

cheerz.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
biza43
Senior MemberPosts: 2,150Gear list
Like?
Re: Which prime lens would be your pick in the 28-35mm range?
In reply to FChris180, Apr 24, 2013

I am a recent convert to the Zeiss ZE lenses, use two of them with my 6D: 25 f/2 and 50 f/1.4. They are both excellent, and I find manual focus quite easy to achieve.

What I also find is that the files require less mid tone constrast boost in LR, compared to other lenses I have used in the past. And the "feel" of the lenses is something that needs to tried in the flesh to be appreciated.

That said, I would choose the focal lens based on my preferences, and on my subjects, primarily. Things you talk about (3D, microcontrast, etc) are too subjective and variable from person to person, to draw any meaningful conclusions.

-- hide signature --

www.paulobizarro.com

 biza43's gear list:biza43's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
NancyP
Senior MemberPosts: 4,124Gear list
Like?
Re: Which prime lens would be your pick in the 28-35mm range?
In reply to FChris180, Apr 26, 2013

I am loving my Sigma 35mm f/1.4 at f/1.4 for night shots, mostly astro-landscapes in very dark areas. What I can't tell you is how good the AF is for extreme dark, because I do critical focus manually on live view. Also, I have a 60D, which doesn't have a great low light AF to begin with.

 NancyP's gear list:NancyP's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ed rader
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,056
Like?
the 28 f2.8 IS is sharp.....
In reply to FChris180, Apr 27, 2013

as hell from the get-go but I just swapped mine for the 35 f2 IS because I like the length just a bit better.  plus f2....

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ed rader
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,056
Like?
Re: If for reportage work...
In reply to FChris180, Apr 27, 2013

I've rented the sigma and the 35 f2 IS and I bought the 28 f2.8 IS.  the 28 is the smallest and it is critically sharp wide open.  if you like the FL this is a great lens.  the sigma is sharp wide open too, an amazing lens really but large and heavy and well...sigma.

where the f2.8 IS is similar in size to the 50 1.8 the 35 f2 IS is similar to the canon 50 1.4.  at f2 it is not as sharp as the f2.8 wide open but you do have the extra stop  and I prefer the FL.

the canon lenses are going to focus better on the new canon FF sensors.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ed rader
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,056
Like?
Re: Which prime lens would be your pick in the 28-35mm range?
In reply to Gunzorro, Apr 27, 2013

Gunzorro wrote:

Canon EF 35/2 IS is my choice.

I don't care about how it compares to Zeiss or Sigma, since neither of those brands had the feature set I want: IS and AF in a relatively compact lightweight package.

Bingo. Plus one lens may not work with your next camera and the other doesn't AF and is hella costly.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
sean lancaster
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,473Gear list
Like?
Re: If for reportage work...
In reply to ed rader, Apr 27, 2013

If I was going to pay for the Canon 35/2 IS then I would easily choose the Sigma 35/1.4 instead. I have no desire to have IS in a FF 35mm focal length. Even 50 is pushing it as to whether IS would benefit my shooting. 85mm and greater, sure.

But I wanted small with the good quality and decided on the older Canon 35/2 and I find it to be a great value.

 sean lancaster's gear list:sean lancaster's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony Alpha 7 Voigtlander 35mm F1.2 Nokton Sony FE 55mm F1.8 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ed rader
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,056
Like?
for what it's worth.....
In reply to sean lancaster, Apr 27, 2013

ken Rockwell agrees with you :-).

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Collett
Senior MemberPosts: 4,998
Like?
Huh?
In reply to ed rader, Apr 27, 2013

ed rader wrote:

Gunzorro wrote:

Canon EF 35/2 IS is my choice.

I don't care about how it compares to Zeiss or Sigma, since neither of those brands had the feature set I want: IS and AF in a relatively compact lightweight package.

Bingo. Plus one lens may not work with your next camera

Why the concern that Sigma may not work on ones next camera if it's a Canon? Any basis for this?

-- hide signature --

Jim

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
sean lancaster
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,473Gear list
Like?
Re: for what it's worth.....
In reply to ed rader, Apr 27, 2013

ed rader wrote:

ken Rockwell agrees with you :-).

Well, even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while.

 sean lancaster's gear list:sean lancaster's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony Alpha 7 Voigtlander 35mm F1.2 Nokton Sony FE 55mm F1.8 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ed rader
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,056
Like?
Re: Huh?
In reply to Collett, Apr 27, 2013

I figure my next camera is 3-5 years in the future the sigma may need to be rechipped or something by then and the new canon lenses are optimized for my current camera (5d3).

http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2012/08/01/autofocus-reality-part-3b-canon-cameras

I really am amazed by how few misses I get anymore.  like I said I did rent the sigma and the only things I did not like about it were size, weight and sigma. I prefer canon lenses.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Collett
Senior MemberPosts: 4,998
Like?
Re: Huh?
In reply to ed rader, Apr 27, 2013

ed rader wrote:

I figure my next camera is 3-5 years in the future the sigma may need to be rechipped or something by then and the new canon lenses are optimized for my current camera (5d3).

http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2012/08/01/autofocus-reality-part-3b-canon-cameras

Interesting read.

I really am amazed by how few misses I get anymore.  like I said I did rent the sigma and the only things I did not like about it were size, weight and sigma. I prefer canon lenses.

I have had the 5dIII for about 4 months or so.  Unfortunately, the lens I had the most issues with on my 5dII gives me inconsistent results on my 5dIII - the 50L.

All my other lenses don't give me a problem and the Sigma 35F.14 Art has been very accurate on my 5dIII.  I am still trying to figure out what going on with the 50L, and its a bit of a pisser because that was one of the main reasons I upgraded and the 50L is one of my favorite lenses.

I agree with you on the Sigma's weight and size.  I wish I had an F1.4 35mm as sharp as the Sigma in a package the size of the Canon 35F2 - but I know that cannot happen.  For me the choice was for F1.4, and I have other lenses like the 40mm pancake and 24mmF2.8 IS for a lighter smaller set up.

Canon has done a nice job with its recent lenses, but it would be nice if they were a bit cheaper.  I paid about $650 for my 24F2.8IS and honestly I think this should go for more like $500 and the 35F2IS should be priced a bit higher - but eventually less than $600 IMOHO.  Hope time solves that issue.

-- hide signature --

Jim

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ed rader
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,056
Like?
Re: Huh?
In reply to Collett, Apr 27, 2013

when I got the 5d3 my 24-70L II became screaming sharp wide open. the 5d3 and the 24-70L II is just a fantastic combination.  I hope the 35 f2 IS (comes Tuesday) is sharper wide open than it was on my 1ds mark III which in general produced softish files compared to any other canon DSLR I have owned.

I hear you on the price of the new canon primes.  after all the renting and trading I did to get the 35 f2 IS I won't tell you what it really cost me :-).  still would rather own it than the 35L, which I have owned before.

i'll probably feel better about the 35 f2 IS price after the 35L II is released ;-).

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads