Sigma 24-70 2.8 Vs Canon 24-70 2.8L

PaulieC

Is the optical quality difference as big as the price difference?

I got a Canon 28-135 IS recently, but it's 5.6 at it's fastest at the wide end. I know IS adds a couple stops to combat shake and lets you get shots you might not otherwise be able to get, but I'd prefer a faster lens to IS.
The Canon is out of my price range at the mo (and reastically with three kids and mortgage etc, forever!), but according to FM, the Sigma is a reasonable substitute. Has anyone used it or owned it? Any opinions?

elven

That's the sigma I was thinking about purchasing this year as a walkabout. I'll be watching this thread with interest... in the meantime here are some reviews:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=97&sort=7&cat=37&page=1

And here's it compared to a Tamron:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1027&message=21956621&changemode=1

rymus

The Sigma 24-70 was pretty much the first lens I got way back when I first got my 20D and it's still fairly heavily used. It's fast, wonderfully sharp and the macro on it isn't half bad.

It is a bit on the noisy side (focusing motors noisy) but it's a good tradeoff for the quality, both optically and build quality. Ohh, it's a heavy lens too in case that enters into the decision process..

PaulieC

> I have the Tamron, it is amazing and is optically comparable (if
> not better) than the Canon 24-70L (although a lot of people will
> argue).

According to someone on that dpreview forum...

rymus

cambo_gueno wrote:

According to someone on that dpreview forum...

That says it all...

I'd agree that alot of people would be willing to argue on that though... Argue more so that whoever posted that needs his or her head examined by a medical professional.

PaulieC

I suppose it would have to be the sigma rather than the tamron for 2 reasons
1) it's a bit wider at 24mm
2) it can be bought in a shop locally. No one seems to stock Tamrons in Dublin (apart from Conns) and I'd want to trade in one or two lenses

rymus

only sticking point about the sigma is that it's an 82mm filter. Quite large...

Something to bear in mind if you've got an extensive collection of filters already. Thankfully I didn't when I bought it so invested in a Cokin P series setup some time ago...

magicbastarder

a wise man once said "most lenses are better than most photographers".

localchap

I don't know much about Sigma 24-70, the only thing I heard its a big deal to get a good sample but overall it provides very significant results compare to Canon 24-70 plus nearly 3 times cheaper. I own Canon 24-70, pretty good one, I absolutely love it, although picked my sample out of 2, the first one provided horrible chromatic abberrations throughout the all focus lengthes.

rabbitinlights

magicbastarder wrote:

a wise man once said "most lenses are better than most photographers".

A very wise man!

PaulieC

magicbastarder wrote:

a wise man once said "most lenses are better than most photographers".

care to expand?

magicbastarder

i think what i was getting at was that if the canon lens is that much more expensive, you'll be paying a hell of a lot of money for a relatively marginal increase in quality.

georgey

Hi all, I have the sigma about a year now and its a great lens for the money, its very sharp has great contrast colour and good macro fun at 24mm, that said the focus is so so, I have it on a 1DmkII and I still have problems trackin even slow subjects coming straight at me (kids walkin etc)you hear people saying its loud, enough said when you put your 50 1.4 back on and have to put it to your ear to reasure yourself that its working cause its so quite in comparison,maybe its a trade off but I plan on buying a 24-105 for outdoor use and leave the sigma for indoor work.

magicbastarder

also, lenses these days tend to be very good. photographers tend to be more variable.

PaulieC

yeah, that's what I was wondering...is the canon 3x the quality as it's 3x the price

elven

The real question is - would you actually *see* 3x the quality... I think things like AF speed, build quality and quietness are the only things we could really judge it on beyond optics.

georgey

O.k to clarify, I brought my 1D into conns and tried both the sigma and the canon, brought the results home and had a good look at them, if your a pixel peeper you will find a difference in edge performance wide open between 24-30 or so, there was a small colour and contrast diference throughout but as we all PP our stuff that should not bother you, there is not a 3X difference in quality, but the AF speed is a lot worse.
Philip

rymus

Elven, I'm going to be in Dublin tomorrow if you want to try out my battered sigma 24-70... Should be around until Sunday afternoon/evening.

digitalage

The canon 24-70mm was designed for the demands of a professional photographer, built like a tank, fast focusing, good image quaility, a work horse bascially...the sigma on the other hand was not designed for the professional market as the focus and build does'nt live up to the build of the canon, but the image quaility is on par with the canon. Basically if you going to use the lens like a pro put it through it paces day in and day out then the canon would be a wise investment, if not then then sigma will do you fine once you get a good copy and you can be assured that the image quality is right up there with the canon.

DotOrg

i don't believe the sigma is weatherproofed. it's nice not to have to worry about your lens being water damaged when shooting out in the lashing rain

georgey

some everyday samples...........

leinsterman

elven wrote:

That's the sigma I was thinking about purchasing this year as a walkabout. I'll be watching this thread with interest... in the meantime here are some reviews:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=97&sort=7&cat=37&page=1

And here's it compared to a Tamron:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1027&message=21956621&changemode=1

Hi J ... you can borrow my Sigma 24-70 F.2.8 if you want to give it a go ... PM me and we can meet some time to exchange for lunch in Ranelagh since we both work near there ... failing that pop by some evening with your lap top and you can give me another CS2 lesson in exchange ...

I like mine now having initally hated it ... I sent it to Cork to get it adjusted by Liam at Hahnel under the Sigma warranty ... it was initially on the soft side for a 2.8 ... but sharp now ... as Rymus says it is noisy so not ideal for wildlife ... not bad for portraits though I still prefer my 50mm 1.8 ... I'd not consider it a walkaround since it weights half a ton ... for a good cheap lightweight walk around try the Sigma 18-125mm (I also have one of these if you need a lend) ... also the cost of 82mm filters is enormous... over €110 for a circular polariser ... unless you go for P series Cokin set ... but these are not great quality imo ... this should feature in your budgeting ... you will need a polariser and a UV/Skylight for something so big.

... given your skills with shooting wee things I'd be interested to see what oyu make of its macro capability ...

PaulieC

A Canon-refurbished 24-70 L with 10 month's warranty left for 450 GBP. Would I be mad not to??

Borderfox

cambo_gueno wrote:

A Canon-refurbished 24-70 L with 10 month's warranty left for 450 GBP. Would I be mad not to??

mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Go for it. Lovely Lens