How do sigma EX HSM compare to Canon IS USM L?

[Columbus Photo]

I'm sure this has been asked before but is the difference that great from the Sigma to the Canon? The price is alittle cheaper for the sigma and was wondering if it gives you good quality comparable to the L series lenses?

[velvetjones]

All depends on who you ask. Nearly everyone will agree that the Canon product is going to be better. How much better and is it worth the sometimes double amount of money that you would have to pay for the Canon over the Sigma...that depends on what you do with photograpy and how picky you are. I have the Sigma 70-200 EX HSM, and I am very happy with it. For me, it isn't worth the $500 or so more that I would have paid for the Canon version. But, if I had the cash to just throw around, I would have bought the Canon. Sigma is a good company, and MOST of their lens are very good ones, at least in the EX line.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Hi Columbus,

This is a tricky one,. I seem to recall a very good thread in the past that compared some of the general merits,. but I could not find it in this search :(
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/search.php?searchid=81057

On the whole,. it is difficult to compare entire lines, as both groups will vary from product to product, but where there are compatible lenses (apples to apples) almost without exception the Canon is "better"

However,. when price is taken into account,. the "bang for your buck" method of viewing things can certainly put some Sigma's out in the lead. (Velvet's 70-200mm f/2.8 example being a very good one. That Sigma is a true marvel)

Also,. Sigma makes some superb lenses for which there is no direct Canon eqivelent.

When buying Sigma look for two sets of "letters"

HSM as you mention, this is Sigmas fast adn quiet focusing motor.. in some models as fast as Canon's USM but usually not quite as fast.

EX The EX line is Sigma's high quality line made for professionals and serious enthusiasts.

Lastly,. you mention IS in the title,. Sigma really can't compete here. They made one "IS" lens the 80-400mm "OS" EX zoom... however they failed to put there HSM motor on it,. making it much less competitive than it really should have been.

It's been nearly three years since that single OS was first announced,. and as yet no mention of a second OS lens has been made.

If IS is important to you, than Canon is really the only option.


I am of the opinion that Sigma's "EX" lenses as a group are the best third party lenses made.

[Columbus Photo]

Thank you! You've confirmed my suspicions! I guess I may run a few tests and find out for myself! I was hoping they had a version of the IS which apparently they "use" to have one.

Thanks again!

[blackviolet]

personally, i've had great satisfaction with EX glass. you wanted to compare EX HSM to IS USM L - EX doesn't have IS. the 80-400 has sigma's OS, which fails miserably (in my opinion) compared to canon IS. hopefully they'll make improvements. i would love to see EX glass around 500 with OS mk2 :cool:


i also have several canon L lenses and in each case where i've purchased them, i've been very happy (no remorse, etc.). if i were in the market for a 70-200 2.8, i think i would most likely pickup the sigma EX.
was thee a certain lens you were looking at?

[scottbergerphoto]

I own the Sigma 500mm f/4.5 EX APO HSM. At $1500 plus tax less then the Canon 500 f/4, it's a stellar performer. It is very sharp and focuses very fast. It came from B&H with a 7 year warrany included. You really have to compare on a lens by lens basis.
Scott

[Columbus Photo]

Hey Blackviolet
I am looking at either the 2.8 L IS USM or the 2.8 EX But not sure if its worth the price for the L. I do mainly protraits, weddings, School pics. As I have been reading it sounds like the 2.8 EX HSM would be a great buy and save money for other lenses.

[KevC]

Hey Blackviolet
I am looking at either the 2.8 L IS USM or the 2.8 EX But not sure if its worth the price for the L. I do mainly protraits, weddings, School pics. As I have been reading it sounds like the 2.8 EX HSM would be a great buy and save money for other lenses.

Which focal lengths?

Everybody here is in love with their 70-200mm f/2.8L. The Sigma version is pretty highly regarded aswell. If you don't need the low light performance, maybe look into the 70-200mm f/4L? If you have a 20D or DrebelXT the higher ISOs deal pretty well with noise.

Also, another 3rd party lens that's highly regarded is the Tamron 28-75mm XrDi.

[tim]

If my memory and calculator are both working, F4 is only one stop slower than F2.8. With the 20D moving up one ISO level isn't a huge deal, so the F4 might be a good option for 20D owners. How valuable is the extra stop on the F2.8 in practice?

[shaun3000]

1/250" is only one stop faster than 1/500". Can you hand-hold a lens at 400mm at 1/250"?

[22littlereasons]

I have the sigma f2.8 and just over this weekend had the opportunity to try the Canon equivalent (without IS).

I was shooting a hockey game in a fairly well lit arena. Pictures from both lenses looked pretty much the same to me. The differences I noticed were in the weight and auto focus.

The canon lens seemed lighter compared to the sigma. And the Canon zoom was quieter and slightly faster.

Now, is the Canon lens worth an additional $1000 or so over the sigma for these differences, well I guess that depends on how much of an exacting person you are. For me, I put the $1000 towards another lens.

[tim]

1/250" is only one stop faster than 1/500". Can you hand-hold a lens at 400mm at 1/250"?

Fair point, but I can increase the ISO to get the stop back.