Should I get Sigma 18-35mm when I got a 35mm prime?

[Theodor Lundqvist]

I'm in need of help with finding a new lens, specifically a wide angle lens. First of all - I do mostly video and the majority of the time on a steadicam or handheld. My camera is the Canon 60D, which means a crop factor of 1.6.

I've been using the old Canon 35mm f/2 a lot (love it) but its hard to get smooth footage with it on a steadicam. Therefore I've used my Tamron 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 at 18mm when I'm shooting moving shots. So the focal ranges I use the most are 18mm and 35mm.

Though, the image quality of the Tamron is not the best and when I'm in low light situations (which is quite often) I find myself hesitant between trading the wide angle for my fast 35mm. Therefore I've now set out on a difficult journey to find the ultimate lens for my needs.

What I want:

- Fast, at least 2.8
- Wide angle
- Preferably not too heavy since I'm on a steadicam
- Prime or zoom are both OK
- Price preferably not more than 1000 US$ but I see it as an investment so I'm ready to pay more

What I don't want/need:

- 16mm or lower - I don't like the look of UWA
- IS - it would certainly be nice but at shorter focal ranges it's not as big of an issue
- AF - again, it would be very nice since I also do a lot of photography but it's not a must

One lens that caught my attention is of course the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8. It would be exactly what I'm looking for if it were not for the fact that I already have a 35mm and that it's heavy at 810g.

I've also thought about getting a prime, like the Samyang 16mm f/2, Canon 20mm f/2.8 USM or Canon 24mm f2.8 STM. Though, the 16mm is all manual and maybe too wide for my liking, the 20mm doesn't have the best picture quality and the 24mm is a bit too long due to the crop factor.

The Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 is also an interesting option, though here the image quality isn't either as good as the 18-35mm wide open and not as fast.

I keep getting back to the Sigma 18-35mm. Its image quality, focal range, low maximum aperture and price would probably make it the lens I would have on my camera nearly all the time. If I bought it I could sell my 35mm but I can't really decide. Is there any better option?

[Andy Wilkinson]

Hi Theodor and welcome to DVInfo.

Many have said the 18-35 Sigma is great lens and I am sure it would be a great choice...but since you already have a 35mm (I have the newer Canon 35mm F2.0, the one with IS, and love it) what about the Tokina 16-20mm F2.0 in EF mount?

It's the latest, fast wide angle from Tokina, makers of the well regarded 11-16mm F2.8 (versions I and II) amongst other wide angles.

I bought one a few months ago for my Sony FS5 (and Canon C100, plus 7D - stills only on the latter these days).

More initial thoughts about it on my website blog - but in summary it has truly superb image quality, super sharp and very low CA, even at F2.0 and is a joy to use/manual focus with :-)

[Dave Baker]

Originally Posted by Theodor Lundqvist

The Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 is also an interesting option, though here the image quality isn't either as good as the 18-35mm wide open and not as fast.

I started a thread about this particular lens a few days ago http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-eo...ex-dc-hsm.html. Partnering it with a 60D gives me very disappointing results, neither as good (by a long way) as any of my vintage primes, or my ancient Vivitar 70-210mm zoom.

[Gary Huff]

You should not purchase a Sigma that does not have the "Art" designation.

[Dave Baker]

Useful to know Gary, even if a bit late for me. Hopefully it will help the OP though.

The annoyance is, the EX part of the nomenclature stands for Excellence, meaning it is part of their professional range, it is said. Hah! Really?

[Theodor Lundqvist]

Hey everyone and thank you all for the advice!

@Andy Oh, I haven't seen that Tokina. Looks really interesting! It's more expensive than the Sigma though. I'm planning on going to a store to try out some lenses and hopefully they got it.

@Dave Ok, got it! Thanks for the info.

@Gary Alright! I've never had a Sigma lens before but I've heard that before the Art series it was a mostly a hit or miss with Sigma lenses.

[Pete Cofrancesco]

I'd recommend the 24mm pancake lens. I just bought one for the same purpose (steadycam work).
1. It's inexpensive
2. It's crazy light and small.
3. Image quality and focus is good.

Note with the crop factor it's only 38mm. When the subject gets close the dof wide open gets tricky. For tight indoor situations 17mm and below is helpful for angle of view and dof.

The sigma 18-35 is popular but the size and weight aren't ideal for steadycam.

[Theodor Lundqvist]

Noted!

I do think 24mm is too tight, though. I like 18mm on my 60D - not too wide but just right! I'll check it out, though. Thanks for the recommendation!

[Pete Cofrancesco]

Then youre looking at ultra wide primes. They're substantially more expensive, heavier and you have to be careful of the front element. But if you need that angle of view...

Thats why the sigma 17-35 is a popular choice because its not much heavier than ultrawide fast prime and you have the flexibilIty of a zoom. you could also get a full frame camera then you don't need an ultra wide lens.

Price, weight, angle of view, pick your poison.

[Gabe Strong]

The Sigma 18-35 is one of the best lenses you will find.
But, it IS pretty heavy. Not sure if it would be the lens for
Steadicam.

[Pete Cofrancesco]

My 24mm pancake lens came in the other day it's a pleasure on a steadycam for interior work it's too long for my liking with the crop. If the subject get with in a couple of feet the dof becomes shallow. Its good for head and shoulders view.

For me anywhere between 12 to 17 would be ideal. For example filming bride down the aisle you need that uwa.

I tried flying the 17-55mm. The 17mm is a good angle of view. The size and weight make it harder to fly. It's one thing level but flying at a modified tilt or any manipulation is harder. The size and weight is comparable to the sigma 18-35.

I'm inclined to pickup an off brand uwa prime for flying. Samyang 14mm f2.8 @ $300 1.2lbs
Sigma 15mm @ $600 13oz (twice the price half the weight)

[Dan Brockett]

Originally Posted by Pete Cofrancesco

My 24mm pancake lens came in the other day it's a pleasure on a steadycam for interior work it's too long for my liking with the crop. If the subject get with in a couple of feet the dof becomes shallow. Its good for head and shoulders view.

For me anywhere between 12 to 17 would be ideal. For example filming bride down the aisle you need that uwa.

I tried flying the 17-55mm. The 17mm is a good angle of view. The size and weight make it harder to fly. It's one thing level but flying at a modified tilt or any manipulation is harder. The size and weight is comparable to the sigma 18-35.

I'm inclined to pickup an off brand uwa prime for flying. Samyang 14mm f2.8 @ $300 1.2lbs
Sigma 15mm @ $600 13oz (twice the price half the weight)

I use the Canon 10-18 STM IS 4.5-5.6 on my 80D on my Zhiyun Crane Gimbal. For a cheap lens, I love it but it's a slow lens, really only great for exteriors. Pretty sharp though and the IS helps the gimbal.