Canon vs Sigma

[Brianbar]

Not sure if the attached link has been mentioned before, but it's very interesting regarding certain lens.

http://www.slo-foto.net/reviews-56-page1.html

Brian

[tim]

It's been mentioned many times, I have it bookmarked for when people want a comparison, it's a excellent comparison article.

[ron chappel]

Thanks Brian. Quite a few of us know about this link by now but it's allways good to post it again to show those who haven't!

Not only is it a very well done comparison but it's the **ONLY*** comparison of it's type on the net that i've heard of!!!! How insane is that?? This is one of THE most asked photo questions on the net, yet before this test appeared there was no real solid facts-only opinions and informal ,non controlled tests.

*for the record the test methodology may not be absolutally perfect but it's pretty close (only single examples of each lens were used and they don't say if they bracketed focus)

Overall it shows several things straight away-

The sigma 70-200 EX is no slouch,
The user reports about how sharp the 70-200/4 is are not exadurating!
...and even average lenses like the 75-300 IS can be made to look good ;) :lol: :lol: (it's not as good when in actual use in the feild)

[tim]

Ron, there is another similar article around, but i've lost the link :(

[sixshot]

I'm a long way off from buying such a lens, but its still good you shared the link. Cheers.

[ron chappel]

Ron, there is another similar article around, but i've lost the link :(

Wow,if you find it again could you please post it? That would be great:)


...also-i hope i don't sound like a know-it-all in my last post. I'm abit up and down this week i must admit (health reasons)

[condyk]

Having owned the Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 and the Canon 70-200mm f4.0L, both very good copies, this was interesting reading. I know that the Sigma produced better and more consistent results for me. I think it's worth the little extra cash if you don't need the lightness of the f4.0L. I dunno about the f2.8 Canon's but I wouldn't pay the extra over the Sigma personally from images I've seen, certainly for the non IS version.