Canon 28mm f1.8 USM or Sigma 24mm f1.8

[richard thompson www.fotoz]

Hello all.

I want a f1.8 wide angle prime for my Canon 10D for my indoor shots

at weddings. When used at f1.8 or f2, with ISO of 400 or 800, I can

get away without using a flash in darkish rooms.

 

Bear in mind that I won't be using the lens stopped down, but at

f1.8 or f2, and I will be using a 1.6x crop body so edge of frame

sharpness is not crucial.

 

All I've read about the Canon 28 f1.8 isn't that great. But compared

to what ? It cant be that bad, can it ?

 

Of the three sigma wide angle f1.8 primes, the 24mm seems to come up

best in reviews, photodo.com and photozone.de ratings.

 

So is it the Canon 28 f1.8 at ?300 or the Sigma 24mm f1.8 at ?200.

 

I'm only interested in optical quality. USM is nice, but not a

necessity. I already have 28mm covered at f2.8 - its that f1.8 I

want !

[WM]

Hi Richard,

 

I haven't used the Canon 28/1.8 but from what I have read, it is not a great lens. I had the Sigma 20/1.8 and it is one superb lens optically. Eye popping stuff !

 

Now that I am shooting 10d, I also bought the Sigma 24/1.8 EX to use as my "normal" superspeed lens that I use for low light/everyday walkabout and it is a superb lens as well. Sharpness, colour rendition, no colour fringing and you can focus down to about 2-3 inches (it is also a Macro lens by the way), though Sigma only rated it as focus down to 6 inches (don't know why??).

 

I think Sigma does not make very good zooms but they sure have excelled at the short primes and the 20/1.8, 24/1.8, 28/1.8 trio are superb examples. You won't go wrong...........and the price is attractive too.

 

The downside is.........the switch from AF to MF needs a two step thing which takes about 2 seconds, and the AF is quite noisy. If you want absolute silence, then Canon USM is the only answer. Apart from that, I would buy the Sigma 24/1.8 again if I needed another 24mm.

 

All the best !

 

Wee-Ming

[john20]

Hi Richard:

 

I can't speak for the Sigma, but I did own the Canon 1.8 for about a year. It is soft. No other way to describe it. I shot a couple of weddings with it, and didn't like it.

 

John

[chris_carroll]

I also owned the lens and can tell you that mine was unable to

deliver acceptable sharpness at f1.8 or 2. Another Canon option,

essentially the same speed, a little longer, and with excellent

glass, is the 35/2. I had a good performance from a Sigma

24/2.8, but had to get rid of it because of incompatibility with a

new EOS body--a pitfall you need to be aware of when buying

Sigma lenses.

[chris_carroll]

The other thing is, a 28mm on a 10d is a normal lens, not a wide

lens. 24mm would barely be wide. Sigma makes a similar

20mm, too, that would give you a moderately-wide perspective.

Or maybe you're actually looking for a normal lens for digital and

I'm getting hung up on the use of 35mm film format terminology.

[yakim_peled1]

<p> I - personally - wouldn't touch either. The Canon 28/1.8 is not good wide open and I read too many horror stories about <a href="http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html#compatibilitythirdparty">compatibility problems</a> with Sigma lenses. Search here and you'll find plenty of posts. Like you, I'm only interested in optical quality. Because of that I'd sacrifice faster aperture and get Canon 24/2.8 or 28/2.8. Slower? Yes. Better? Yes. Future proof? Yes.<p>

 

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim.</p>

[richard thompson www.fotoz]

Sigma 24mm f1.8 - picked up a mint condition used one for ?140 (about $200). I'll test it out and if I'm not happy may sell it again - but I shouldn't lose any money on it.

 

What I REALLY want is the 35mm f1.4 L - a perfect 'normal' lens for the 10D. But it just isn't worth the price tag...

[richard thompson www.fotoz]

For the record, I'm going to sell the Sigma 24mm f1.8 straight away.

Stopped down to f2.8 or more its fine.

 

It is very poor at f1.8. Infact much worse than my Tamron 28-75/2.8 at 2.8.