canon 24-70ef or sigma 24-70 dg

[missmoloko]

I am looking into buying either a canon 24-70 or a sigma 24-70 for use at weddings. For use with my 20d and 5d.

Has anyone used both? Can you tell me what the difference is apart from the obvious price difference.

Missmoloko

[mxfun]

I used to have the Sigma 24-70 EX DG when i used Pentax and it's was a belter ,sharp as a tack and versatile .:thumbs:

[sidxms]

The canon is obviously better, just a question of whether you can stomach the price.

Since it looks like you are going to use it for professional work, I'd suggest getting the canon.

sid

[mrgubby]

I've got the Sigma and I'm very happy with it.

From what I've heard (but could be net-myth) Sigmas tend to suffer from poor QC, you may have to go through a few copies until you get a good one.

But as the the prices seem to be £290 for the Sigma & £940 for the Canon you could buy three copies of the Sigma & keep two for spares (Sigmas come with 3 year warranty so that's 9 years of cover :D)

[malla1962]

For me it would have to be the canon but I would say that as I wont use anything else, plenty of people are happy with the sigma and its a lot cheaper.

[puddleduck]

For me it would have to be the canon but I would say that as I wont use anything else, plenty of people are happy with the sigma and its a lot cheaper.

Opinions such as these - and I don't mean to be arsey or sound like I'm trying to kick one off for the sake of it - are essentially worthless.

If you won't shoot with anything else, then you shouldn't be answering Canon vs Sigma question. Simple as that.

An answer - to be useful - has to be free of bias.

I really am not trying to provoke an argument, just wondering if you think your post is actually helpful in helping someone spend money?

:)

[malla1962]

Opinions such as these - and I don't mean to be arsey or sound like I'm trying to kick one off for the sake of it - are essentially worthless.

If you won't shoot with anything else, then you shouldn't be answering Canon vs Sigma question. Simple as that.

An answer - to be useful - has to be free of bias.

I really am not trying to provoke an argument, just wondering if you think your post is actually helpful in helping someone spend money?

:)plenty of people are happy with the sigma and its a lot cheaper. That is usefull.

[mxfun]

There's a lot of brand snobbery on this site ,Maybe the Canon 24-70 is better,but not always .There have been several posts commenting on the newTamron 70-200 f2.8 sharpness and quality of results compared to the Canons equal ,also the Tamron being 1/3 the price of the Canon.....Just shows ya...eh!.....Just my opinion .:thumbs:

[missmoloko]

Has anyone experience of using both and if so can you explain any differences. I obvioulsy want something that is pin sharp.

Missmoloko

[Organic]

If you can afford it then I'd recommend the Canon. It is now on my 1DmkIII around 80% of the time. Downside is the share weight of the beast.

[missmoloko]

Hi

Thankyou for everyones advice.

I think I am decided on the canon. Price is an issue but theres always credit cards. But I have learnt a bit from the past I keep buying the cheaper option and then a few months or years on I realise I want better. So probably best going for the best in the first place.

Missmoloko

[tdodd]

Compare the two here....

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=101&Camera=9&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=372&CameraComp=9&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0

Just hover the mouse on and off the arrow at top centre to switch back and forth between the two lenses.

[grumpybadger]

I've had both. I reckon on image quality they were comparable but the Sigma was slower to focus and I found the focusing a bit hit and miss. That's why I got rid of it.

[neonpollen]

Compare the two here....

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=101&Camera=9&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=372&CameraComp=9&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0

Just hover the mouse on and off the arrow at top centre to switch back and forth between the two lenses.

I've seen this site before, how accurate is it ? Here is a comparison of an EF 50mm F1.8 Mk II against the EF 24-70L both at F4 and looking at the site it shows the 50mm as much sharper, it that really true ?

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=105&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=3&LensComp=101&CameraComp=9&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2 (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=105&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=3&LensComp=101&CameraComp=9&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2)

[malla1962]

I've seen this site before, how accurate is it ? Here is a comparison of an EF 50mm F1.8 Mk II against the EF 24-70L both at F4 and looking at the site it shows the 50mm as much sharper, it that really true ?

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=105&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=3&LensComp=101&CameraComp=9&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2 (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=105&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=3&LensComp=101&CameraComp=9&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2)You
cant compare a zoom with a prime.

[neonpollen]

Hmmmn, if it was an L series prime I would agree, but I would be surprised if a £70 prime is sharper than all the L series zooms. This is maybe a topic for a different thread I don't want to derail this one.