Sigma 19mmF2.8DN vs. Sony1.8/35

[mlevin77]

I'm a fairly novice user. I got my A6000 camera recently and a Sony 35mm f/1.8 lens that it came with.   Recently, someone got me a Sigma 19mm F2.8DN as a present. My question is, are these two sufficiently different that I need to keep both.  I mostly take pictures of either nature/outdoors (sunsets, that sort of thing) or my kids around the house. I already have a macro lens, and my next plan was for a telephoto (perhaps the Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS). I am not sure I'm sophisticated enough of a user to really appreciate the difference between the Sigma and the Sony, enough to carry both and swap them around in the appropriate circumstances. Anyone has an opinion about these two, to know whether I should keep one (and if so, which one) or whether they are sufficiently different (and if so, under what usage scenario for each one).  I've played with it a bit and it looks like the Sigma has a wider field of view, but if I were to need that, perhaps I should just get a real wide-angle lens someday?

 

Also, I thought that the Sigma had the ability to manual focus even when the camera was in autofocus mode; is this true? I can't seem to use it - I rotate the manual focus ring and nothing whatsoever seems to happen.

[thegreatone3]

I have both of these lenses as well and for me they each have specific uses. For me, the 35f18 is the perfect indoor, low light lens with the large aperture and OSS. Great for kids, parties, social events. It's a great "people" lens, but I sometimes find that it's too tight a shot.

 

The Sigma 19mm is my budget wide angle lens. So mostly landscapes, but also real estate, wide group photos, etc. Not quite as wide as other emount options (Sony 10-18, Rokinon 12), but far cheaper. Not sure about the manual focus as it performs very well with Auto focus on my a6000.

 

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

Both lenses are good. The 19mm has a wider field of view. It's good for landscapes, architecture and context photography.

 

The 35mm is also good, more suited to people photography.

 

So there is definitely a use for both lenses.

[Pieter Batenburg]

I also have both lenses although I use the 35/f1,8 very often and the 19mm very rarely. The 35/1,8 has ois and for video I think this is a great advantage. But the focal width is so different that you should keep both. Besides, the Sigma 19 is so cheap that selling it isn't worth the hassle.

[Photo Bomb]

I recently bought the a6500 with the Sony 35mm f/1.8 lens. Taking into account the crop sensor it makes the 35mm more like a 52mm, which is what I wanted for general use with good low light performance. However, even at that I still felt it wasn't wide enough. As an example I wanted to take a picture of my aquarium yesterday and had to back up to the other side of the room to get it to fit.

 

So today I bought the Sigma 19mm F2.8 DN with an equivalent focal length of 28mm that I think will really help with those wide angle shots I want to take. From the YouTube videos I saw with sample shots I felt it was better then the Sony equivalent for 30% less.

[tinplater]

I have the 35mm Zeiss 2.8 and the Sigma 19 and frequently use both.  The Sigma is a wonderful, small, and sharp little lens.  Just have to deal with some distortion, but very capable and a true bargain.  But only you can determine if you need both lenses...use them and draw your own conclusions.