Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Lens Review
The Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM lens is the first in Sigma’s new “Art” line. And given that it’s superior to the Nikon 35mm f/1.4, what a first effort it is! This review will cover the strengths and weaknesses of the lens, with sample photos along the way that I’ve taken with the lens. I’ll warn you from the outset–this is my new favorite prime lens, so if you don’t want to drop $900 today, you might want to stop reading now and look at these GIFs of cats and shoes. (You probably should check that out regardless–you’re welcome for it, America.)
Before getting to the performance of the lens, it’s important to note that this lens is designed for full frame cameras. If you’re using a crop sensor camera, you’re definitely better off purchasing a cheaper crop lens, like the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (read my review of that lens), unless you are planning lens purchases about a future upgrade to full frame. If you don’t know what “full frame” and “crop sensor camera” mean, there’s a 99% chance you’re using a crop sensor camera, in which case this lens isn’t for you. It also won’t work with point & shoot cameras or iPhones, just in case there’s any confusion.
As soon as the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 is unboxed, it’s clear that it’s part of a reinvention of the Sigma brand. Quite simply, it doesn’t look like a Sigma lens. It’s sleek, well built, and has a beautiful industrial design. The lens looks less like something you’d expect from Sigma and more like something you might expect from Apple, if they made lenses. The lens has considerable heft to it, and its brushed aluminum construction just feels good in the hands. Everything from its large build to its lens hood to even the cap just reeks of high quality. It’s really not just a matter of excellent build quality, this lens truly feels and looks nice.
Given that Sigma has been plagued by issues of quality control among other issues in the past, I think this stylistic reinvention was a good move. Here’s hoping Sigma builds on this momentum with the new Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 lens.
Since pretty lenses are nothing but expensive paperweights if they can’t produce excellent image quality, let’s move on to what really matters: performance. In a word, performance is spectacular. When I moved from crop to full frame, one of the lenses I lamented losing was the Sigma 30mm f/1.4.
While not exactly comparable to that lens, in terms of performance (and moreso quality), this new lens makes my old Sigma 30 look like a toy. It’s like comparing King Kong to Dr. Zaius. Dr. Zaius is smart and all, but he’s no King Kong.
Starting with the auto-focus, I was incredibly happy to find that focus locked quickly and accurately, with no front or back focus issues.
Based upon what I’ve read online, there aren’t focus issues with this lens. No more problems exchanging your first copy because it had a front or back focus issue.
As far as sharpness goes, this lens is ridiculously sharp. I shot with the Nikon 35mm f/1.4 two weeks before I bought the Sigma, and I think the Sigma is a tad sharper than the Nikon. I won’t go as far as to say its considerably better (as some have claim), but it is noticeably better. I actually can’t think of any lens I’ve ever used that has been sharper.
Even at f/1.4, it’s incredibly sharp (albeit in a very shallow area), and at around f/8, you have front to back sharpness (in most cases), that make this lens very suitable for field of vision landscapes.
Its other strengths include contrast and color rendition, both of which it delivers beautifully. Although all of the photos in this article have been post-processed to various degrees, they all looked great right out of the camera.
The lens produces images that pop, that have a polished, almost glossy look to them. As important, or perhaps more important, to “the look” of the images coming out of this lens is the bokeh quality. The bokeh is smooth and creamy wide open, and creates a serious sense of separation between subject and background.
I am big on shooting into the sun and other bright light sources, so performance in those conditions is important to me. Wide open into the sun, the Sigma has a soft quality with minimal flare, giving photos an almost ethereal look. Stopped down, it (star)bursts like a champ, delivering starburst-filter like results. These things won’t matter to most, but they’re important to me for my style of photography.
This is all not to say that the Sigma is perfect. It has minor vignetting at f/1.4, and I did notice a bit of chromatic aberration in a couple of shots. However, CA was minimal (and in situations where just about any lens would have it) and vignetting at f/1.4 is far from uncommon. Other than that, I can’t really think of any weaknesses this lens has.
All things considered, what type of photographers would benefit most from this lens? Obviously, as mentioned above, full frame shooters. It might seem like an odd pick because it’s not really a portrait lens (too short) and it’s not really a landscape lens (too long). However, it falls right in between these two ranges, making it suitable for both, as well as normal walk-around, everyday photography. It’s a bit wider than your field of view, which I found to be nice.
In fact, I found myself carrying it on a few occasions as my only lens when we’d walk around Japan. On that trip, it ended up being my second-most used lens, with only the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 (read my review of this lens). I’m primarily a wide angle photographer, so no prime ever sees as much use as the Nikon 14-24mm.
Photographers already using the Nikon 35mm f/1.4 or the Canon 35mm f/1.4 should also consider selling off their lenses and getting this. I can’t speak specifically to the Canon, but I can’t imagine it being better than this, and it is more expensive. As for the Nikon, I’ve used that lens a number of times (I’ll have a full review of it at some point), and it’s at best only as good as this lens.
It might trump the Sigma ever so slightly in terms of bokeh quality, but I think the Sigma trumps the Nikon in terms of sharpness, so call it a draw. The one way it isn’t a draw, though, is price. The Sigma costs less than half as much as the Nikon. So sell that Nikon, buy this, and pocket the savings.
For Disney photography specifically, I think it offers a lot of versatility. There, it becomes a great portrait lens since you can’t always put distance between you and your subjects, and also is a solid lens for use on dark rides (although I found it to be a bit too wide in a few situations).
It performs well delivering sharp landscapes, and although I haven’t had a chance to test it yet for fireworks, I think it would be an excellent focal length for those. Something like a 24-70mm f/2.8 lens is going to deliver more versatility, but I think this will deliver better results, making you want to keep it on the camera more (I find myself using this lens over my new Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC–which I also really like).
Overall, this lens is a King Kong of lenses. It looks and feels great, and performs exceptionally well. It’s incredibly fun to use, moreso than even my old Sigma 30mm f/1.4. Although I’m not huge on prime lenses, I love this one and have left it on my camera for hours on end. At $900 it’s an inexpensive full frame alternative to the first party 35mm lenses made by Canon and Nikon, and it certainly doesn’t have any of the typical characteristics of a budget lens. I highly recommend the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 lens as a go-to, fast prime lens.
If you do want to purchase this lens—or anything else from Amazon—please use the Amazon links in this post (link to the Amazon.com home page). Not only does Amazon offer great customer service, fast shipping, and low prices, but using the links here help support this site at no cost to you and help us continue to provide you with great content.
If you’re looking for other photography equipment recommendations or photography tips in general check out a few of my top photography blog posts:
Photography Buying Guide: Way More Than You Ever Needed to Know…
Best Books for Improving Your Photography
5 Indispensable Tips for Better Vacation Photos
Neutral Density Filter Buying Guide
Your Thoughts…
If you use this lens, what do you think of it? Are you considering adding it to your camera bag? Share your thoughts or questions in the comments!
Hey there, You have done an excellent job. I will certainly digg it and personally recommend to my friends.
I am sure they’ll be benefited from this website.
I read this piece of writing completely regarding the difference of latest and previous technologies, it’s
amazing article.
Visit my blog post … collaborative tools
Just bought this lens today at Tokyo ^_^
Thanks for your review ^_^
Hello my family member! I want to say that this post is awesome, nice written and come
with almost all vital infos. I would like to look extra posts
like this .
I don’t know if you chek older posts, but if you do Ihad a question. My Sigma 30mm lens was on my camera when it was stolen and so I’m looking to replace both. I got a good deal on another Canon crop sensor (60D), as from everything I’ve read/seen, money is better placed on a better lens than camera.
I am uncertain where to go with the lens, since Canon-mount 30mm f/1.4’s are hard to find. Used is an option, or the new version of the 30mm. This one is certainly more $$ than the 30mm, but would provide flexibility if wanting to ever upgrade to full frame. Your recommendation specifically recommends against using this on a crop sensor. Any particular reason aside from the price difference vs the 30mm? Is the extra 5mm too much for a walk-around? I would think staying in the center of a higher quality lens would offer better optics than the 30mm.
Committing to sticking with crop sensor (or selling lens) and going with the new 18-35 f/1.8 is also an option, I suppose. Have you had a chance to use on of those with your D3100?
The reason I don’t recommend it is solely based upon cost. It’s so much more expensive than the 30mm f/1.4. I personally couldn’t justify holding onto it in the event that I might upgrade to full frame at some point, unless my kit were otherwise complete.
You said this would not work on a point and shoot camera or an iphone, but what about my ipad, since it is so much bigger than an iphone would this lense work on it as I am an avid ipadographer speciallizing in taking fireworks photos. (well actually my little boy takes the photos while I hold him on my shoulders).
It might work with a special adapter, but fortunately you have the finest camera and lens combination on the market, so you don’t need to bother with things like lenses, tripods, or common decency. Just keep fighting the good fight and using that iPad to take stunning HD photos! One day one of your images might just cure cancer!!! 😉
Glad to hear I already have the best possible combination of camera and lense. Now if I can just get an adapter for my custom Duffy BlackRapid strap to fit my ipad I will be set
By the way do you have any advice for dealing with rude people that complain when I let my 19 year old son sit on my shoulders to film wishes?
😛
I have been reading nothing but glowing reviews for this lens. I’m definitely looking forward to see what Sigma has to offer with their new line of lenses. I’m particularly looking forward to seeing a new Sigma 50 in the “Art” line.
But at $900, while still cheaper than the Nikon and Canon professional offerings – this is in no way a “budget” lens. $900 is still a good bit of money 🙂
I think it’s all relative. If you just bought an entry level camera and are trying to add another affordable option, it’s certainly not a budget option. However, if you have pro level gear and your alternative is the Nikon or Canon 35mm, this certainly IS a budget lens.
I’m most interested to hear about the 18-35mm f/1.8. Do you think that might replace the Nikon 14-24 as your go-to lens?
(I should say that looking at the price difference between the two lenses, I would be highly surprised if the Sigma held up.)
The two lenses are really in no ways comparable. The 14-24mm f/2.8 is widely regarded as the best wide angle lens ever made, and wide angle photography is my style. By contrast, the Sigma could be one of the greatest prime lenses currently on the market, and is a great walk-around option. They are both very impressive lenses, but one can’t really replace the other in a camera bag.
Personally, the Nikon 14-24mm is my favorite lens, but that’s because it works better with my style.
I meant the upcoming Sigma 18-35mm, rather than the prime. It’s not quite as wide, but has an extra 1-1/3 stops to it’s advantage.
Although, like you said, the Nikon 14-24 is the gold standard. And the Sigma is less than half the price so unlikely to hold up to the quality.
The Sigma 18-35mm isn’t a full frame lens, so it’s not comparable.
Ah. I didn’t realize. I have been avoiding looking at lens news/reviews (except this one, obviously) to avoid temptation!
Excellent review, Tom. Picked up this lens a couple of months ago and I love it! Can’t wait to use it on our next Disney trip.
I noticed you hit 1/4000 shutter speed on a couple of your shots with the D600. Would you recommend using an ND filter (maybe 1-stop)?
It makes my sigma 30mm 1.4 seem like a toy? I really need to rent one of the best Nikon lenses for my DX camera to get an idea of what I’m missing out on. Is there a specific high end Nikon lens you’d recommend for DX that you feel is a “revelation” compared to the tamron 17-50 2.8 and the sigma 30mm 1.4?
As far as DX goes, the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is pretty much the ceiling on quality. You can use this lens on DX, but I just don’t think it would be worth it.
In that case, I have a feeling I’ll be going full frame sooner rather than later!