These lenses are just wide enough to take street photos without being bothered by distortions at the edge of your photo. The Sigma 16mm did make the most of the APS-C sensor offering amazing low light capabilities but in the end it cannot fight physics.Sharp images thanks to image stabilizationĮvery photographer should have a lens with a 35mm focal length in their camera bag. As mentioned above all things being equal I will take a full frame set up every time. The Canon just feels better to me with its less shiny surface that feels a bit more rugged. The Canon is lighter, smaller, and better built.But the Canon is just a no effort keeper machine. I had the Sigma for quite a while and I got some shots I really like. Prices nearly equal the Canon is the better value with it’s macro capabilities, IS, and full-frame compatibility.All other things being equal a factory lens is preferred.But side by side the Canon is the clear winner for me here. It is still an excellent lens that I would highly recommend if you are already invested in the crop cameras that apply. So in the end while these are not direct competitors focal length wise given a choice between the two I would choose the RF 35m and adjust for the focal length. The same could be said about the RF 85mm as well, but I would be much more likely to use the 35mm for video. If 4K were my concern there are a host of other RF bodies that could accommodate. I shoot 1080p so the cropped 4K of the RP did not impact me. I have found the RF 35mm IS combined with the EOS RP digital IS makes for a great video solution that can be used for tripod and handheld use. Neither the body or the camera had IS so it was limited to tripod use. While I shoot stills the most I did use the 16mm for video. Add that aperture advantage to the image stabilization and the Canon pulls ahead again. But once you consider the fact that the RF 35…ĭiffering focal lengths but I will say that f/1.4 works out to an f/2.14 full-frame aperture equivalent. The regular price for these lenses are within $10 of each other. The Canon walks away with this one, especially considering that it is a full-frame lens.īased on price alone this is a draw. Once again like the 50mm the RF 35mm is considerably smaller and lighter than the 16mm lens. Will steer clear of comparing them too much focal length wise, but I will run through the same topics as before. So much so that I used these as much if not more than their, usually favorite of mine, normal lens mates. While the normal and portrait variants of each are very good these wider options create very pleasing images. Similar to the Sigma 16mm the RF 35mm may be my favorite of the three. Not enough of a cost savings to offset Viltrox’s lack of a track recordīut back to APS-C Sigma.Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Lens and (New) Sigma 35mm f/2 DG DN Contemporary Sony E (More choices so narrowed down to lenses f/2 or brighter w/ AF): Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Lens for Leica L and (New) Sigma 35mm f/2 DG DN Contemporary I had left IS off of this list originally but will add it for this list since Canon has released bodies with IBIS since then.: Even with newer 35mm options since not much changes. As I stated in my earlier RF 35mm post this lens puts up a strong showing as compared to other full frame mirrorless mount options. I had the Sigma 16mm, but at a 24mm full frame equivalent they are not technically direct competitors. In those recent 85mm and 50mm posts I compared them to the Sigma 56mm and 30mm lenses for APS-C respectively.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |