Canon 32mm F1.4 vs Sigma 30mm F1.4?

tobicy68 wrote:

Any thoughts on these two?

I took a look at the Sigma 30 a while back when it was popular. It doesn't really have a "following" like the EF-M 32mm does. But it's popular with Sony users because of the aperture. So there's a few people out there using it enthusiastically. The Sigma has issues with Chromatic Aberration (CA), especially when shooting wide. Something that the Canon EF-M 32mm handles very well, presumably due to optical coatings. Another point that people often raise with the Sigma 30mm is that it has some barrel distortion which is often easily controlled with software but it's stronger than a lot of users would like.  I would suggest that few photographers would own both.  But some might have used both and still own one.  One thing I will note about the Sigma is that there's been more than a few complaints about focus issues where the lens did not accurately lock onto the subject.  Several refer to this as an "AF Consistency Issue" with the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 lens.  One user that I referred to in a prior post here complained that the lens worked fine for a few weeks and then the aperture jammed.  I can't say I've heard the same from any of the Canon users with the EF-M lens.  There's also a few different Sigma 30mm f/1.4 lens variants to consider.

Assuming the price for the Sigma would be about the same as the Sony E and m43 counterparts, the Sigma will be about $190 cheaper.

Is the Canon worth $190 more?

Yes. This is a lens that was designed to work exclusively on the EF-M mount.

Anyone have experience with the Sigma on a Sony or m43 system?

Take a look at all the folks jumping ship from Sony just to use the EOS M cameras with the EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM lens. They're not too interested in other lenses, just the 32mm. I've previously read two comments from reviewers who rated the EF-M 32mm lens as being 'as sharp as Canon's EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM lens' with one reviewer stating that he considered the EF lens to be the "benchmark" for lens sharpness with wide aperture lenses but previously thought that was Canon's sharpest overall lens. In my own observations the EF-M 32mm is sharper. And to make it more interesting, it's darned sharp at even f/1.4 - more so than the EF 35mmL lens.
.
The samples below are JPEGS that are straight out of the camera (EOS M6). There's been no editing and even no resizing. No anti-vignetting and no corrections of any kind have been applied.  These were taken when I was testing the EF-M 32mm lens over a weekend prior to the local release of the lens.
.

EF-M 32mm lens - unedited JPEG from camera

EF-M 32mm lens - unedited JPEG from camera

EF-M 32mm lens - unedited JPEG from camera

EF-M 32mm lens - unedited JPEG from camera

EF-M 32mm lens - unedited JPEG from camera

EF-M 32mm lens - unedited JPEG from camera

EF-M 32mm lens - unedited JPEG from camera

EF-M 32mm lens - unedited JPEG from camera

.
I've used my friends old Sigma 30mm lens and it was pleasant. I was enamored with my EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM lens at the time so the sigma wasn't in my line of sight at the time. My friend bought that lens for the purpose of shooting in clubs and in low light but he later moved to Medium Frame and lost all interest in that lens. Most of the people giving it high ratings when it was released hadn't used a lens with a shallow DOF before so they were both overwhelmed and overenthusiastic about it when they bought one.
.
I use the EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM lens for anything that you'd shoot with a 50mm lens (the FOV is the same when using this lens on an APS-C camera due to the crop factor). Since the EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM lens was designed especially for the EOS M camera mount, it makes sense that it might perform better as a result of it's design heritage.
.
There's nothing to stop you from using the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 lens on the EOS M mount if you have other applications for it.  I tend to use the Canon EF-M 32mm lens as an all-purpose lens.  But it has a superb ability for Closeup Photography.  Canon claims you can fill up the entire frame of the sensor with a business card - and this has been my experience as well.  That enables quite a bit of versatility with this lens as you are not just stuck using it for pets and portraits like you might with other "50mm" lenses.
.
The Shallow Depth Of Field is a good reason to want to own either lens and the Bokeh from the Canon 32mm lens is nice.  But bokeh aside, I'm fond of being able to take handheld shots in extremely low light, something I can do with this lens at any time.  Each lens has it own "lens character".  But it's hard to be able to spot which lens was used when comparing the 32mm lens pictures with an ocean of others.  That's probably a good thing because it suggests that it doesn't display any qualities that might catch or distract the eye of a photographer.
.

EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM bokeh characteristics