I've been getting back into photography as a middle aged woman after not doing much of anything with it since high school and college. Back then I had a Pentax K1000 that I loved and took with me everywhere I went. Do digital has been new and overwhelming but also wonderful for me (the immediacy of Lightroom is wonderful).
I currently have only the kit lens, which is 18mm to 55 mm). I have decided to invest in a 35mm prime lens. My reasons are many but are likely important in terms of my question. I frequently find myself wanting to shoot in doors in low light situations (family and friends mostly but not entirely) or where I would like to create a shallower depth of field than what I can achieve with the kit lens. Also, sometimes I spend too much time worrying about focal length and I think it kind of jams me up. I'm looking to simplify. One thing I've decided to start doing is to just carry my camera with me everywhere to start looking at what I see daily in a different way and try to shoot something each day. I live in the suburbs and want to be as low key as possible.
I do not have a full-frame camera, which is why I am looking at the 35mm focal length and not 50mm. I just think it is a nice, versatile focal length. After doing some research it seems that my options are a fairly cheap Nikon f/1.8 that is made for DX cameras. Alternatively, the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art is quite a bit more expensive but (a) would fit a full frame Nikon if I decide to upgrade at some point, which is certainly possible a few years from now and (b) has a wider max aperture. There is also a Nikon 35mm f/1.4 but it is very clearly out of my price range right now.
Certainly the price difference between the Nikon f/1.8 and the Sigma f/1.4 is not nothing for me, but if there are good reasons to pay extra for the Sigma I could do it. Any thoughts on how much of a difference the jump to the Sigma would be in terms of quality, versatility, etc. Or can anyone suggest other options?