Canon v sigma

G

Gregory Hicks

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,147
Name
N/A
Edit My Images
No
Am having a massive equipment change.

Canon gear vs Sigma Ex........

Is there really that much difference? If so what??????
 
Why not just ignore the badge and buy whatever you think offeres the best performance at the price you are willing to pay?

I'd guess that both Siggy and Canon make the "best" at different market / price points. For example the Siggy 50 and 85mm f1.4's are pretty good lenses and arguably beat Canon's offerings but many seem to think Canon's 24-70mm f2.8 beats Siggy's offering.
 
It should become rather obvious what lenses are better after examining and comparing the MFT charges. For example the difference between 24-70mm is wider than the grand canyon, and I haven't seen a good {example} of Sigma 50mm while the 70-200mm non-OS is simply not as good. Some new primes look very attractive though.
 
Im mainly looking at the 10-22, 70-200 2.8 and somethink to cover the gap in the middle of 22-70
 
I have a good exemple of the Siggy 50mm f1.4 :D I also have a good example of the Canon 50mm f2.5 which some think (so I've read) is Canons best 50mm and one of their sharpest lenses and the Siggy is at the very least a match for it at every aperture the Canon can match.

Anyway, lets not get into yet another Siggy front / back focus / soft copy / user error debate :D
 
You probably already know but Sigma did have a bit of a reputation for not working with cameras that were brought out (by Canon) after the lens was made, some could/can be re-chipped but not all to use later capability that Canon put into their bodies, so forward compatability may be a problem with a Sigma Lens/Canon body combo, it never has been with a Canon lens (except maybe EF-s lenses and older bodies, or FF ones). That may have an effect on your decision.

Matt
 
MatBin said:
You probably already know but Sigma did have a bit of a reputation for not working with cameras that were brought out (by Canon) after the lens was made, some could/can be re-chipped but not all to use later capability that Canon put into their bodies, so forward compatability may be a problem with a Sigma Lens/Canon body combo, it never has been with a Canon lens (except maybe EF-s lenses and older bodies, or FF ones). That may have an effect on your decision.

Matt
Click to expand...

that appears to mostly be REALLY old lenses. at least my oldest lens the non-DG 120-300 works fine on my newest body 5dmk2 etc.
 
postcardcv said:
I've owned both the Canon and the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 lenses and the Canon was significantly better, well worth the extra money. However I know that someone will soon be along to disagree with me.
Click to expand...

I agree with Peter 3 things i will mention why canon wins it for me

1 They hold there price better

2 Canon servicing is a lot better ask mrGubby about his 150-500mm woes

3 Canon have a far better range of lens and are all compatable when you buy a new body. Sigma are not licenced by canon they backwards engineer to get their lens to work with canon bodies with the advent of the 1D X and newer technology with the AF system this again could raise it's head as lower models get the new technology .
What im simply saying the Canon lens are future proof to a degree where as the sigma ones may not be.

You do get good Sigma lenses though i have had some.

Regards

Richard
 
Last edited:
neil_g said:
that appears to mostly be REALLY old lenses. at least my oldest lens the non-DG 120-300 works fine on my newest body 5dmk2 etc.
Click to expand...

My son bought a Siggy about 3 years ago, worked fine on his 10D, wouldnt work on my 50D or his later purchased 20D, mid length zoom as I recall (70/200 ish not sure of model designation, I doubt it was top of the range) but to be fair they gave him 50% off a later lens.

Matt
 
ive said it before but i really need to start playing the lottery, we must be 7 for 7 on good copy sigmas now.. :shrug:

lost said:
2 Canon servicing is a lot better ask mrGubby about his 150-500mm woes
Click to expand...

youll always get horror stories, there have been a few about canon on here if i remember rightly.

personally ive always been extremely happy with sigma service, theyve gone above and beyond for me a couple of times. had a free 120-300 tripod mount and alsorts.

simonblue said:
Had a few sigma lens in the past,been let down by them,last time a big repair bill :(
Click to expand...

interesting, what was the issue and lens? ive always had work that came in under the standard tarrifs. including repairing drop damage on the 120-300, they replaced most of the focus mechanicals inc shipping parts from HK for the standard tarrif.
 
simonblue said:
I would,i am with Nikon at the moment,and all my lens are Nikon.

Had a few sigma lens in the past,been let down by them,last time a big repair bill :(
Click to expand...

:-(
 
When I was in the market for a second-hand 70-200, I bought Sigma 70-200 f2.8 HSM II. They were going for roughly the same price as used Canon 70-200 f4 lenses (the f2.8 Canon version is considerably more expensive) so that clinched it for me.

I'm very happy with my choice (it appears to be a sharp copy) but when buying used Sigma lenses I suggest you ask for high-res images taken with the lens, at various focal lengths and apertures, to examine before you buy.
 
Last edited:
ZoneV said:
When I was in the market for a second-hand 70-200, I bought Sigma 70-200 f2.8 HSM II. They were going for roughly the same price as used Canon 70-200 f4 lenses (the f2.8 Canon version is considerably more expensive) so that clinched it for me.

I'm very happy with my choice (it appears to be a sharp copy) but when buying used Sigma lenses I suggest you ask for high-res images taken with the lens, at various focal lengths and apertures, to examine before you buy.
Click to expand...

Thats what in after :-) i hope to get one good
 
Gregory Hicks said:
Im looking at second hand lol. Need more glass but no moneys for new :-(
Click to expand...

Well you have a very high chance to buy a lens someone couldn't get on with... particluraly with Sigma, but also applies to Canon and others. Do all the testing before parting with the money
 
daugirdas said:
Well you have a very high chance to buy a lens someone couldn't get on with... particluraly with Sigma, but also applies to Canon and others. Do all the testing before parting with the money
Click to expand...

Will do. Im always risky about parting with £££ so i want a local one ideally :-)
 
The last sigma Lens I had trouble with, was the 70-200mm F2.8 HMS mk II,the coating went on the lens, on the glass,inside,wasn't under g/tee.

£200 bill :(
 
Last edited:
Copies of lenses vary in sharpness and build quality so I would say to choose based on the actual lens you are thinking of buying. Some Sigma lenses are better than the Canon versions and vice versa. Also do not discount Tamron and Tokina as they both have some fantastic lenses in their line-up (i.e. Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 and Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 non-VC)
 
Gregory Hicks said:
Im mainly looking at the 10-22, 70-200 2.8 and somethink to cover the gap in the middle of 22-70
Click to expand...

IMO the current mk2 Sigma 70-200's (non OS and OS) are better than the mk1 Canon which is still fetching silly prices. At least my copy was better than the Canon I tried and sent back.

And I say this as a Canon man through and through!

I wouldn't hesitate to buy another, or any other good 3rd party lens.
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
IMO the current mk2 Sigma 70-200's (non OS and OS) are better than the mk1 Canon which is still fetching silly prices. At least my copy was better than the Canon I tried and sent back.

And I say this as a Canon man through and through!

I wouldn't hesitate to buy another, or any other good 3rd party lens.
Click to expand...

I had tested many great canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS mk1, one duff non IS (f**** and badly serviced by Canon) and to be honest even my f/4 non IS performs miles better than sigma mk2 non-OS I've tried: correct focus, just too soft at 200mm.
 
Can't say mine is soft at 200mm even wide open. I'm guessing it's copy variation.

That said, I found the non IS canon 70-200 f/4 sharper than the mk1 canon 70-200 f2.8 across the whole range. I was far more impressed by the neat little Canon f/4 than their f/2.8! Had I not needed a fast lens I'd have the f/4 in a flash.
 
Last edited:
I own a 70-200 2.8, 85mm f1.4, 10-20 f4-5.6 and also the tamron 28-75 f2.8, for the price they are they are great value for money especially when they're usually 1/4 / 1/2 the price of the canon versions and not that far behind for image quality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top