Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 Vs Canon 24-70mm f2.8

K

Keith Fusco

Suspended / Banned
Messages
334
Name
Keith Fusco
Edit My Images
Yes
Apart from the brand name, and the red ring at the end of the Canon lens, what's the difference between the two lenses?

I'm after the 24-70mm Canon lens, but the price tag may be a little too much, as myself, and the wife have a baby on the way, so I was thinking about the Sigma one.

I've had the 70-300mm, and 28-300mm Sigma lenses previously, and those were good, but sold them to fund the new lens, so I'm not left with all Canon stuff, so shall I start to get back to Sigma?
 
Having had both ... the quality of pictures it takes would be my answer.. the difference in colours between sigma and canon is massive IMHO
 
The sigma is great value for the price its at. And you can get some good ones at an amazing price second hand (just make sure its a sharp copy). However, i really want the Canon one. I'm sure the AF is faster and the images are just that bit better too

Mike
 
the sigma one is good though, i dont know whether the canon is that much better. given the choice i would have had the canon, but im happy with my sigma and the few quid it saved
 
neil_g said:
there is a new version of the sigma due out shortly supposed to blow the old one out of the water, plus it has HSM.
Click to expand...

and a price similar to the canon;)
 
neil_g said:
there is a new version of the sigma due out shortly supposed to blow the old one out of the water, plus it has HSM.
Click to expand...

It's around £900 though which is far too much to compete with the names of canon and nikon. It needs to be around £600 to stand a chance IMO.
 
The existing Sigma supposedly has 90% of the performance but only costs 35% of the price of the Canon.

I bought the Sigma and it does me quite nicely :)
 
Hmmm i get stuck on thease two aswell not just in thease focal lenghts to.

being aviation photgraphy mad i was stumped with the choice of the two main lens's we use which are the 100-400L is which i opted for and the sigma 150-500mm os

i chose the canon for its is perfomance on moveing subjects and its aperture capabilitys . sometime i **** i had the extra 100mm but then realy i should get a 2x converter but for now the 400l is WIKIDlast summer wasa total wash out but i still managed to sell pics took with the 100-400 is so cant be bad.

BUT with the credit crnch and all that if it affects u then get the sigma always a good altrnate choice IMHO

i realy love the sigma macro range to
 
Having tried the Sigma for a couple of weeks and used the canon a few times here are my observations

Sigma - not internal zoom, so you get a change in physical dimensions when zooming. Canon is internal zoom.
Sigma - not HSM, af isn't bad, but the Canon is miles ahead. I had issues with AF consistency on the sigma
I found the sigma very poorly designed in the handling area - the zoom ring is very small and there is a lot of glass to move about. Maybe it hadn't had enough time to free up - but the positioning of it meant I kept catching the onboard flash.

When I hit focus the sharpness was very good, no complaints there. But AF in low light was not impressive wheras the Canon snaps into focus each time.

If you are aware of the shortcomings then it is a fine lens. Unfortunatly I can't agree with 90% of the peformance at 40% of the price because for me peformance is about more than the optics
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top