Sigma 70-200 2.8 EX and Canon 70-200 2.8 L

[mattchase]

I finally got my hands on a Canon 70-200 2.8 L for a short time, and attempted to conduct some sharpness testing between it and the Sigma. I only intend to compare sharpness, not focus speed or anything else. Out of all the shots I took, I posted just 4 photos, basically the same test conducted twice. I didn't have the best subject matter to work with, but feel this is a good enough start for comparing these two lenses. And next chance I get, I will test them again, hopefully finding some better subject matter next time.

http://www.matthewchase.com/digitaldingus/sigma_canon_70-200/

[bluebomberx]

My Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 EX HSM and Canon EF 50 f/1.8 MkI are my favorite lenses. Here are some shots from the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 EX HSM that were taken yesterday. I'll put up some 100% crops when I come home from work tonight.

The last photo of them could've used a smaller aperture, but this one had the most spontaneous feel. I wish I had more time to spend with them.

All photos were taken with a Canon 10D and Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 EX HSM and converted to B/W in Photoshop with the channel mixer.

http://home.swbell.net/ryer52/temp/175_7541.jpg%20

http://home.swbell.net/ryer52/temp/175_7557.jpg%20

http://home.swbell.net/ryer52/temp/175_7562.jpg

[CyberDyneSystems]

Thanks for this post Matt,

The difference seems pretty minimal,. to be sure,. but the Sigma images have more contrast.. the white lettering is more detailed and readable... (the exposure difference that you mention?)

..on the other hand the Canon's "underexposure" may be benificial in this instance as the "hotspots" on the Sigma image (like the area around the "Kr" ) are blown out.

But exposure can be compenstaed either way and is decided by the camera's meter,.. so it is hard to apply either judgement to either lens...

I will be getting a Canon in November from Dell,. at which point I intend to do a fairly exhaustive side by side on my own so I can decide which lens to keep. (I've had the Sigma for some time and really enjoy it)

[mattchase]

Hi Richie, thanks for the additional examples.

Cyber, I did similar testing when I first got my Sigma, shooting in studio under controlled lighting and with better subject matter. Unfortunately I didn't keep those images, and also didn't have the time to go back into the studio and conduct these same tests. I will again eventually when I have the time. I look forward to seeing the results of your testing.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Assuming these lenses give similar results as far as image quality 99% of the time,. I think what is going to make or break who gets sold and who goes in the bag for good will be performance/usabilty.

Which will autofocus faster?,. will the IS really matter? ( I will be comparing against an IS model Canon) etc.....

As the lens will be used to catch action either in the wild on on my Stage at work... speed and focus accuracy will play a key factor.

Unfortunately this will leave a lot of my testing to be unreapatable and subjective.... but in the end if I get a card full of images that look better on one lens and it was easieer to use,. that will be my winner.

[bluebomberx]

I've linked to a couple of high-res photos. These are from a Canon 10D and Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 EX HSM. They have obviously been post processed in Photoshop. I tweaked the exposure a minor amount on each image, converted to b/w with the channel mixer, resized to 5x7.5 at 300DPI, and finally sharpened them with Fred Miranda's 10D CSPro action. Standard post processing if you will... Anywho, to sum it up, this is a great lens at a great price point.

1/250 at f/2.8 - 5x7.5 at 300DPI - 1.24MB (http://www.phototalk.net/rryerson/albums/private/126_2647.jpg)

1/250 at f/14 - 5x7.5 at 300DPI - 1.38MB (http://www.phototalk.net/rryerson/albums/private/IMG_0405.jpg)