Canon lenses vs Sigma lenses

[Lorek]

Hi guys !
I hope this topic has not been raised before.
I am considering buying new lenses. Money is important but I also don’t want to be disappointed with my equipment. Can you help me to make up my mind?

Canon 24-70 mm f 2,8 L USM* *vs* *Sigma 24-70 mm f 2.8 EX DG macro
Canon 70-200 2,8 L IS USM* *vs* *Sigma APO 70-200 mm f 2.8 EX IF HSM macro

I know already about the canon lenses but I don’t know anything (I mean really nothing) about Sigma product. Is it good stuff?
When it comes to the 70-200mm the Sigma does not have the image stabilization. Is it a big handicap?

Please tell me honestly what you think about theses lenses. What would be your choice?

What does EX, DG, IF and HSM stand for?

[JDArt]

Scratch the Tamron 24-70 and get the Sigma 28-75 f/2.8 XR Di. This is a great lens. I own it. I would recommend against spending big bucks on the Canon equivalent.

http://www.photocamel.com/index.php/topic,955.0.html

http://www.photocamel.com/index.php/topic,5771.0.html


The telephoto zoom may be a different story. I have not used the non-Canon lens you refer to, but the fact that the Canon version has IS would make me look closely at this one if I needed that range, which I do NOT. I find the 70-200 range to be neither here nor there, either too short or too long for my typical photographic purposes. The Canon version is a very heavy lens, too, so you have to be willing to lug it around.

[Lorek]

Originally Posted by JDArt

Scratch the Tamron 24-70 and get the Sigma 28-75 f/2.8 XR Di. This is a great lens. I own it. I would recommend against spending big bucks on the Canon equivalent.

you mean scratch the SIGMA 24-70 and get the TAMRON 28-75 f/2.8 XR Di ?

[JDArt]

Originally Posted by Lorek

you mean scratch the SIGMA 24-70 and get the TAMRON 28-75 f/2.8 XR Di ?

Yes.

[Max@Home]

Hi Lorek,

What does EX, DG, IF and HSM stand for?

EX = Exclusiv, HighQuality, like 'L' (luxury) with Canon

DG = Digital Grade, coatings optimized for digital camera's. Note DG is still FullFrame! The EF-S equivalent of SIGMA is called DC.

IF = Innen-focussierung, internal focussing, so no turning outer lens elements (usefull if you use polarizing filters)

HSM = HyperSonicMotor, silent focussing, SIGMA's USM equivalent

(source: http://www.sigma-foto.de/cms/front_c...ent=1&idcat=15,
or http://www.sigma-photo.com/lenses/lenses.asp if you prefer English )

If you can miss/spare the extra 4mm on the wide end, IMHO the Tamron 28-75 is a better lens than the Sigma 24-70.

The main difference between the Sigma 70-200 and the Canon 70-200 NON-IS is the buildquality (and colour rendition )

I shot and compared the Sigma and the NON-IS 70-200 Canon, on my -then- 10D you could easily see the SIGMA had a slightly warmer tone compared to the Canon (a reddish/yellowish 'cast', not annoying, just different ).

In the end, I opted for the Canon 70-200 IS, as IMHO IS is a very very usefull extra, giving the lens more versatility.

The 70-200 IS is my second most used lens, the (Canon) 24-70 is my most used 'workhorse' (- at the moment - ).

Main difference between the Canon and SIGMA 24-70: again build quality and colourcast: in the case of the 24-70's I tested, the colour difference was a bit less pronounced than on the 70-200's I shot, but the difference in build quality was more evident between the 24-70's.

Hope this helps some, *my* €0.02 worth...

Kindest regards,

Max@Home

[Lorek]

Thank you Max. Yes it helps.
To make it short the Canon lenses are better. Is that right? Now I have to sale my body to get more money!
Take care

[Mr. Pickles]

Typically, Canon lenses are better than Sigma, but you have to look really hard sometimes to see it. I think L glass is a click better, and easier to see. I actually have (2) Sigma lenses and (2) Canon lenses. If I get the lens I really want, it will have Sigma written on it. I do have the Canon 70-200 and it IS slightly better than the Sigma optically. But the Sigma is black, if you don't want to be noticed as much.

I actually like some of the Sigma stuff. THey have more good stuff than Tamron or Tokina, but each of those have a really good lens or two, too.

[rpcrowe]

I am not a Canon snob and use Canon lenses (including a couple of L lenses), a Tamron, two Tokina's and a Sigma. IMO, the big problem with Sigma is the reverse engineering which may leave you without an operational lens if Canon releases a new body. Sure, Sigma will rechip a Sigma lens that is currently in production but, will/can not rechip a lens that is out of production. I have four lenses that are no longer produced: Canon 50mm f/1.8 Mark-I, Tokina 400mm f/5.6 ATX, Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Macro (earlier version) and a Sigma 28mm f/1.8. All of these are fine lenses and obviopusly I can use the Canon on both my 10D and my XT. This is also true of the Tamron and Tokina lenses but, I cannot use the Sigma on my XT and Sigma will not upgrade it because it is not a lens in current production.

The Sigma system of reverse engineering could force you to either retain an older Canon camera or sell the Sigma lens when you upgrade your Canon body.

[Rumpole]

Originally Posted by Lorek

Thank you Max. Yes it helps.
To make it short the Canon lenses are better. Is that right? Now I have to sale my body to get more money!
Take care

I am not a Canon snob although I only use Canon lenses.

With my limited experience, I tend to believe that Canon lenses are better but are they worth the extra $ over the Sigma counterpart, that is the question only you can answer. In short, I have (blind?) faith in Canon or else I would not have chosen their bodies.

However, it seems that the resale value and potential are better for Canon products.

Cheers
KH

[FocusingOnFlorida]

Lorek,

I would recommend going to a local camera shop, if you have one near you. Test your lens options and see if you can see the difference. If that is not an option, you can do as I did and search the internet for unbiased opinions and tests of each lens. I have not tried the the lenses you listed in either the Sigma, Canon, or Tamron. I do have the Sigma 105mm DG Macro and it is a very sharp lens. I guess from what I've read that its AF is a bit slower than the Canon, but in my case that doesn't mean much as I typically use MF for macro work. I also own the Tamron 17 - 35mm. I love this lens for wide angle. It is sharp and seems built ok.

I have read that Sigma quality control is not up to par with Tamron or Canon and that it can be hit or miss with getting a good lens. I can't say wether or not that is true, just something to consider and research prior to buying. I've also heard about the rechipping problems with Sigma lenses. One would hope that if you pay enough for a lens, they would keep up with the rechipping to keep customers happy.

[Darryl_Lessere]

I had a bag of Canon primes and sold for a Tamron 28-75 and have never regretted it.
The SIgma 18-50 gets a lot of praise as well.

On the longer side, a lot of praise on the new Canon 70-300 IS.

IS is well worth having when shooting handheld over 70mm and none of the 3rd party lensmakers have it.

[Lorek]

Thank you guys. Your comments are useful
Best regards