Sigma 30/1.4 vs Canon 32/1.4

Hi,

After reading too much this forum, I decided to "upgrade" my Sigma 30/1.4 to Canon 32/1.4. There was no really good reason to do that, I was satisfied with Sigma. Just price difference was not so much high: 320 EUR vs 460 EUR, and here in this forum were too much praise to Canon and not so much to Sigma.

I had to replace first Canon 32/1.4 lens, because its focusing clearly had some defect, mostly photos were blurry even with 1/200 F/8, it was too loud and trembling. Replacement is better, but I still find focusing a little trembling and slower than Sigma's.  Optically Sigma was very good, I will test Canon later. I just expect that Canon will be not worse than Sigma...

I could post some comparison photos, but DPR doesn't allow more than 20MB files in gallery.

casus wrote:

Hi,

After reading too much this forum, I decided to "upgrade" my Sigma 30/1.4 to Canon 32/1.4. There was no really good reason to do that, I was satisfied with Sigma. Just price difference was not so much high: 320 EUR vs 460 EUR, and here in this forum were too much praise to Canon and not so much to Sigma.

I had to replace first Canon 32/1.4 lens, because its focusing clearly had some defect, mostly photos were blurry even with 1/200 F/8, it was too loud and trembling. Replacement is better, but I still find focusing a little trembling and slower than Sigma's. Optically Sigma was very good, I will test Canon later. I just expect that Canon will be not worse than Sigma...

I could post some comparison photos, but DPR doesn't allow more than 20MB files in gallery.

Hope you enjoy your canon. I think the sigma is ry great because its slightly wider and I prefer its bokeh rendition over the canon.

This reminds me of the early days when the Czech car manufacturer Skoda was bought by the VW group and I was an early adopter (now on my 3rd Skoda). The issue I still have from friends is brand snobbery and many people do not realise that the Skoda of old has nothing to do with the "New Skoda".

Likewise "New Sigma" is as good and very often better than the Canon, Nikon, Sony equivalents and the sooner people recognise this the sooner people will stop having  "surprises" such as the one faced by the OP here. If you were happy with your 30/1.4 Sigma what was the reason to "upgrade" to Canon? If the 30/1.4 is anywhere near as good as my Sigma 56/1.4 then dear I say that you had the best 30-something anyway!

Hope you resolve your issues with the Canon 32/1.4.

Some food for your thought

Today, Sigma EF-M 30mm lens is $309 and Canon EF-M 32mm is $479

IoannisZ wrote:

I was looking you tube videos the other day and many have said that sigma has better (quicker) autofocus. Other said that canon has the possibility from the meny to change something. (I don't remember exactly if it was regarding the video or the photos). Also one from this forums said that to me that it quicker when he proposed the sigma for street photography. Canon has better contrast on the other way but the money difference is quite big, plus filter size plus the internal movement of the front part on sigma vs canon. There are many differences and many choose the sigma.

The Canon has a focus limiter switch. If you set it to 0.5m to infinity, rather than full, it may focus a bit quicker (but not closer than 19 inches). I find the Canon to be superb. I also find the Sigma 56 to be superb, and the Sigma 16. I already had the Canon when the Sigma was released in EF-M mount. I have read that the Sigma is a bit quicker focusing, but I have never missed a shot on the Canon due to focus speed, so I don't know whether it makes any practical difference.

casus wrote:

Hi,

After reading too much this forum, I decided to "upgrade" my Sigma 30/1.4 to Canon 32/1.4. There was no really good reason to do that, I was satisfied with Sigma. Just price difference was not so much high: 320 EUR vs 460 EUR, and here in this forum were too much praise to Canon and not so much to Sigma.

I had to replace first Canon 32/1.4 lens, because its focusing clearly had some defect, mostly photos were blurry even with 1/200 F/8, it was too loud and trembling. Replacement is better, but I still find focusing a little trembling and slower than Sigma's. Optically Sigma was very good, I will test Canon later. I just expect that Canon will be not worse than Sigma...

I could post some comparison photos, but DPR doesn't allow more than 20MB files in gallery.

I went with the Canon 32mm due to its size and weight.  The store allowed me to mount it to my M100 and test it before paying.

IoannisZ wrote:

I was looking you tube videos the other day and many have said that sigma has better (quicker) autofocus. Other said that canon has the possibility from the meny to change something. (I don't remember exactly if it was regarding the video or the photos). Also one from this forums said that to me that it quicker when he proposed the sigma for street photography. Canon has better contrast on the other way but the money difference is quite big, plus filter size plus the internal movement of the front part on sigma vs canon. There are many differences and many choose the sigma.

Yup, lots of little differences. Choose based on personal preference.

In regards to autofocus, a lot depends on the body it's mounted on (plus the Focus Limiter position).  For instance on the M6ii it's very fast, and I have used it for sports both indoors and out, daytime and nighttime.  Speed has never been an issue for me.

R2

Jimmytech wrote:

casus wrote:

Hi,

After reading too much this forum, I decided to "upgrade" my Sigma 30/1.4 to Canon 32/1.4. There was no really good reason to do that, I was satisfied with Sigma. Just price difference was not so much high: 320 EUR vs 460 EUR, and here in this forum were too much praise to Canon and not so much to Sigma.

I had to replace first Canon 32/1.4 lens, because its focusing clearly had some defect, mostly photos were blurry even with 1/200 F/8, it was too loud and trembling. Replacement is better, but I still find focusing a little trembling and slower than Sigma's. Optically Sigma was very good, I will test Canon later. I just expect that Canon will be not worse than Sigma...

I could post some comparison photos, but DPR doesn't allow more than 20MB files in gallery.

I went with the Canon 32mm due to its size and weight. The store allowed me to mount it to my M100 and test it before paying.

The Canon EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM is the sharper of the two lenses. The EF-M 32mm lens is on par with the EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM lens, which is a lens considered by many to be the sharpest EF lens that Canon has produced. I have previously suggested that the EF-M 32mm may even be sharper though it's difficult to compare these two lenses side-by-side as they were designed for use on different sensors and different types of cameras. Having used both lenses I'm immensely impressed with the results from both.
.
The Sigma 30mm came along first and it was later reincarnated as the Sigma 30mm f1.4 DC DN Contemporary Lens for the Canon M-Mount. But the Manual Focus is sometimes problematic with some claiming that the mechanical operation of the focus ring doesn't match the speed at which the pressure and speed to the focus ring is applied. The Sigma model is also known for poor copy-to-copy variation. The noise from the AF motor has also been considered too loud and disruptive for video. Many online reviews have claimed this lens is unsuitable for video for this reason.

.
One of the reasons there are so many "good reviews" for the Sigma lens is because it was the first Wide Aperture lens that many people bought for their camera ... and this impressed them so much that they were quick to proclaim it as the best lens in its class. That might be the case in the Sony world where a lot of these lenses ended up, but if you look closer, you'll find that most of these reviews are overwhelmingly from people that were not using them on the EF-M mount or the EOS M camera system. Try to find reviews that were written about this lens on the EOS M or consider the opinions of members here that are using the lens on the M camera.
.
The best value lens is undoubtedly the Sigma 30mm f1.4 lens - due to similar FOV, similar aperture and similar performance. The optical quality from the Sigma is close to the EF-M 32mm lens. The best optical and operational performance is from the Canon EF-M 32mm lens. It appears to be better suited to video with a focus breathing speed closer to cinematic lens operation but with less noise than the Sigma when shooting video.
.
* The only concern with buying Sigma lenses for use on Canon cameras is the repeating issue of potential incompatibility with future body models which may or may not continue to operate properly (or at all) with non-Canon lenses. It happens occasionally and it's been a problem for Sigma and their lenses. It seems to mostly affect Canon cameras using Sigma lenses - and it may occur where the communication protocols conflict with the lens fitted. It's just a risk that should be noted. Last week there was a complaint that some of Sigma's ART lenses weren't working properly on the EOS R cameras and that's an example of what I'm referring to.
.
With the current models of EOS M cameras, the Sigma lenses appear to work fine, whether or not they are adapted or use the native EF-M mount. Obviously, the Sigma 30mm f1.4 DC DN Contemporary Lens for Canon M-Mount is the best choice for those wanting something close to the 30mm FOV.
.
If anyone is put off by the optional Lens Hood for the EF-M 32mm Canon lens (which is somewhat expensive and seems slightly larger than it needs to be), there are some other hoods from other lenses that will fit.

I took Canon because:

it is sharper, smaller and almost no CA.

I have it on m6 mk II and it is fast focusing lens with no issues. Focusing speed is good, because I have tested with 14 fps my boy was running towards me. 90% was on focus.

Really good lens.

I inclined to keep the Canon 32/1.4, but I can still change my mind if I find Canon's focusing problematic, I didn't test it enough yet.

2Marco:

> But the Manual Focus is sometimes problematic with some claiming that the mechanical operation of the focus ring doesn't match the speed at which the pressure and speed to the focus ring is applied. The Sigma model is also known for poor copy-to-copy variation. The noise from the AF motor has also been considered too loud and disruptive for video. Many online reviews have claimed this lens is unsuitable for video for this reason.

It is definitely not the case for Sigma DC DN Contemporary 30mm/1.4. On my M6II it was focusing very fast, much faster than Canon, precise and quiet. Manual focus was predictable, I used it not much, though.

Resized (original is too big to upload to DPR Gallery) to 6000x4000 photo with Sigma:

Center crop from original:

R2D2 wrote:

In regards to autofocus, a lot depends on the body it's mounted on (plus the Focus Limiter position). For instance on the M6ii it's very fast, and I have used it for sports both indoors and out, daytime and nighttime. Speed has never been an issue for me.

R2

You can see in my "gear list" that I also have M6II, and my first "30er" was Sigma. And it was definitely faster and quieter focusing than Canon's lens.

Alastair Norcross wrote:

The Canon has a focus limiter switch. If you set it to 0.5m to infinity, rather than full, it may focus a bit quicker (but not closer than 19 inches). I find the Canon to be superb. I also find the Sigma 56 to be superb, and the Sigma 16. I already had the Canon when the Sigma was released in EF-M mount. I have read that the Sigma is a bit quicker focusing, but I have never missed a shot on the Canon due to focus speed, so I don't know whether it makes any practical difference.

Focus limiter switch reminds me of car's manual transmission. Thanks for the tip. BTW, I am going to buy Sigma 56 mm later this month.

casus wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

In regards to autofocus, a lot depends on the body it's mounted on (plus the Focus Limiter position). For instance on the M6ii it's very fast, and I have used it for sports both indoors and out, daytime and nighttime. Speed has never been an issue for me.

R2

You can see in my "gear list" that I also have M6II, and my first "30er" was Sigma. And it was definitely faster and quieter focusing than Canon's lens.

The Sigma might be faster because the bigger size allows for faster AF motors. I've tried the Canon 32mm on my M50, and on that camera it focused too slow for me, but others are reporting it's fast enough on the M6mkII. You're experience here confirms my expectation the sigma is the faster focusing lens.

About IQ: The Canon is a tad sharper, and has more contrast. And to my eye that's a very nice advantage. The performance of the Canon is also significantly better in the very corners at wider apertures. There aren't a lot of cases when you might need that, but if you do landscapes at larger apertures the Canon performs a lot better here.

About compatibility problems with the R: i didn't read anything about compatibility problems with modern Sigma lenses (art, contemporary, or sports series)on the RF mount without a solution for it, but i could have missed something here, i don't read everything. As far as I know all modern Sigma lenses do work fine with current Canon mirrorless cameras, the R5 included.

If portraits is your thing check which bokeh you like the most.

If you don't have a 22mm f/2.0, note that the sigma is a tad wider. Those 2 millimeters can make a big difference in tighter spaces. It can be a downside as well of course, but if it's your only bright lens and you want to use it indoors in low light, the upside might be more important.

casus wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

In regards to autofocus, a lot depends on the body it's mounted on (plus the Focus Limiter position). For instance on the M6ii it's very fast, and I have used it for sports both indoors and out, daytime and nighttime. Speed has never been an issue for me.

R2

You can see in my "gear list" that I also have M6II, and my first "30er" was Sigma. And it was definitely faster and quieter focusing than Canon's lens.

I can see your gear list. I was replying to loannisZ...

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64376992

R2