LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


Canon & Sigma 24-70 f2.8 Test (merged)

FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Thread started 23 Jun 2005 (Thursday) 20:33   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
 
LightRules
"flat out embarrassing"
LightRules's Avatar
Joined Jun 2005
9,908 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

I just put this up at my site:

http://www.pbase.com/l​ightrules/2470exlexternal link

***Update Below***
Sept 22 2007

Well it's been some 2 years and 3 months since I posted this comparison (from June 2005). The update here is as follows:

*I had used 3 copies of the 2470L up through June of 2005, and the best copy was the one in this June 2005 comparison. The 2470EX DG Macro in the test was my only copy I had but it was calibrated at Sigma NY for front-focusing (obviously came back fine and good).
*Since the comparison, and after having used these 2470 lenses quite a bit, I came to the conviction that the 2470EX was at least as good, if not better, than the L optically. You can see my findings here:
http://www.pbase.com/l​ightrules/2470exlexternal link
*I eventually sold the 2470EX (reluctantly) to a good man in Missouri (Lincoln Westfall).
*Lincoln recently sent this copy of the 2470EX to Klaus at Photozone for a test (on a APS-C body).
*Here are the results:
http://www.photozone.d​e/8Reviews/len...0_28/​index.htmexternal link
*You can see it's a solid performer, to say the least. Consistent with my own findings.
*And here you can compare PZ's findings with the 2470L they have used (count all FOUR of them):
http://www.photozone.d​e/8Reviews/len...0_28/​index.htmexternal link
*I think we can fairly conclude at this point that the EX is a complete "steal" of a lens (i.e., a properly functioning one, of course). It lacks the L's refined build and weathersealing and ring USM with FTM and "sexyness" (which is why so many buy the L :lol: ), but at $375, the EX remains a very solid bang for buck standard zoom.
*Note that both my tests and PZ's only consider APS-C bodies, so how these lenses compare at the edges on APS-H or FF is undetermined.

So consider this thread "updated".

Post #1, Jun 23, 2005 20:33:07




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Loaded
Member
Joined Jun 2005
41 posts
Dallas Texas
[MORE/SHARE]

i have the Sigma I was wondering how i can test for front focusing

Post #2, Jun 23, 2005 21:11:43


Kodak DX6490/Canon 20D/bat. grip/eye relief/Sigma 24-70f2.8/Tokina 80-200f2.8/ Canon18-55kit/75-300 Canon USM/Hitachi 4 gig MD---- More to come

Blessed be the Lord my rock
who trains my hands for war
and my fingers for battle.
Psalm 144:1

Semper Fi

LOG IN TO REPLY
lost
Goldmember
lost's Avatar
Joined Jan 2005
1,008 posts
Houma, LA
[MORE/SHARE]

Unfortunately I was not able to view most of the pictures. I have the Sigma and would like to know asside from the USM how they compared.

Post #3, Jun 23, 2005 22:06:16


Canon 7D
Canon EF 100-400L - Sigma EF 24-70 2.8 EX DG Macro Canon EF 50mm 1.8 - 580 EX

"Its all fun and games till the rent check bounces." Lost

LOG IN TO REPLY
lost
Goldmember
lost's Avatar
Joined Jan 2005
1,008 posts
Houma, LA
[MORE/SHARE]

Does any one know if a 67mm filter would do? I could get one for my 70-200 f4L and a step down ring. Hmmmm its a thought.

Post #4, Jun 23, 2005 22:29:22


Canon 7D
Canon EF 100-400L - Sigma EF 24-70 2.8 EX DG Macro Canon EF 50mm 1.8 - 580 EX

"Its all fun and games till the rent check bounces." Lost

LOG IN TO REPLY
Nightcrawler
Senior Member
Nightcrawler's Avatar
Joined Jun 2004
685 posts
Omaha, NE
[MORE/SHARE]

I am having problems seeing the pics too.

Post #5, Jun 23, 2005 22:46:50



Jason - Gear - Siteexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
LightRules
THREAD ­ STARTER
"flat out embarrassing"
LightRules's Avatar
Joined Jun 2005
9,908 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

It's pbase acting up again. Hopefully they'll have it working soon enough. As for focus testing, just shoot a lot at f2.8 and you'll know soon enough if your copy is fine or not. I should say also that many "focus problems" are user error, especially when working with narrow DOF or shooting against low contrast subjects. But fire off several hundred shots at f2.8 and you should be able to tell how your focusing is.

Post #6, Jun 23, 2005 23:49:20




LOG IN TO REPLY
OceanView
Senior Member
OceanView's Avatar
Joined Apr 2005
370 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

Is the Sigma still having problems when using a 20D?
If so, that's a shame.
I would like to have tried it out.
Anyone know for sure?

Post #7, Jun 24, 2005 00:27:24 as a reply to LightRules's post 38 minutes earlier.



LOG IN TO REPLY
LightRules
THREAD ­ STARTER
"flat out embarrassing"
LightRules's Avatar
Joined Jun 2005
9,908 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

It's up now, re-loaded:

http://www.pbase.com ...o/image/45240719/or​iginalexternal link

Post #8, Jun 24, 2005 09:13:29




LOG IN TO REPLY
blue_max
Goldmember
blue_max's Avatar
Joined Mar 2005
2,622 posts
London UK
[MORE/SHARE]

Let's get one thing clear before I comment. I like Canon lenses.

Now, I agree that in this test the Sigma more than competes with the Canon. In some of your shots it definitely is better (well done on not moving the camera!).

The only thing I would say is that the Sigma had special attention. All lenses are mass produced. Your Sigma was looked at on an individual basis and fine tuned by professionals. One could argue that the Canon may have been more able to compete on a similar basis.

I don't have either lens, but this shows that the Sigma has the quality in the actual glass – the trick seems to be getting the most out of it. That also goes for the Canon.

It's rather sad that it seems to be such a lottery.

Graham

Post #9, Jun 24, 2005 09:44:52 as a reply to LightRules's post 31 minutes earlier.


.
Lamb dressed as mutton.

LOG IN TO REPLY
condyk
Africa's #1 Tour Guide
condyk's Avatar
Joined Mar 2005
20,848 posts
Birmingham, UK
[MORE/SHARE]

As usual, a great contribution. Very nice test. This is such an important range for many and I am amazed by the results. I had fully expected the Canon L to win, not easily but by a notable margin. The Sigma is better throughout ... it's that simple.

Post #10, Jun 24, 2005 09:45:41


http://photography-on-the.net .../showthread.php?t=1​203740

LOG IN TO REPLY
LightRules
THREAD ­ STARTER
"flat out embarrassing"
LightRules's Avatar
Joined Jun 2005
9,908 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

Graham, your comments are well-taken. It should be noted though that my previous 24-70L actually went to Canon Irvine for calibrating as it was horrendous out of the box; I couldn't get a single shot in focus, it seemed. After I got it back, they replaced the main circuit board, adjusted the front element, and it was quite good. But "quite good" was about equal to this 3rd L I currently have. Regardless, QC is a serious issue today with many makers, and my Sigma did get a hands-on inspection. But again your comments are well-taken.

Post #11, Jun 24, 2005 09:49:35




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
blue_max
Goldmember
blue_max's Avatar
Joined Mar 2005
2,622 posts
London UK
[MORE/SHARE]

fStopJojo wrote:
Graham, your comments are well-taken. It should be noted though that my previous 24-70L actually went to Canon Irvine for calibrating as it was horrendous out of the box; I couldn't get a single shot in focus, it seemed. After I got it back, they replaced the main circuit board, adjusted the front element, and it was quite good. But "quite good" was about equal to this 3rd L I currently have. Regardless, QC is a serious issue today with many makers, and my Sigma did get a hands-on inspection. But again your comments are well-taken.

And this is the Canon lens that I suggest has a quality control issue – and get slated for perpetuating an urban myth!

The lens IS capable of being fantastic – many say so. It IS horrendously expensive for what it achieves (24-70). I can not imagine spending so much on a lens and finding it so poor. It is no wonder that the likes of Sigma and Tamron have capitalised. It is the focal length that is ideal for a general purpose lens and the battleground has never been hotter. It's great to have such a choice, but I am disappointed to hear, yet again, that this particular Canon lens has not performed. I so want to buy it, but it has to be clearly better than the opposition and it obviously isn't always.

Thanks for posting the test. Just maybe Canon will listen and it will up the quality for everyone.

Graham

Post #12, Jun 24, 2005 10:39:20 as a reply to LightRules's post 49 minutes earlier.


.
Lamb dressed as mutton.

LOG IN TO REPLY
LightRules
THREAD ­ STARTER
"flat out embarrassing"
LightRules's Avatar
Joined Jun 2005
9,908 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

The L costs about $1200 and the EX costs $365. If it were simply optics, either the L is overpriced or the EX is way underpriced. But the $800+ difference is going to be in overall build refinement, weathersealing (rubber O-ring), and the excellent USM. For some this is worth it, for others it isn't at all. In terms of AF speed they are actually very close, except that the EX makes noise while the L is ninja silent. I don't like the L's hood as it feels flimsy and is too bulky; IMO a solid, flower-petal one like the EX is both smaller and will provide plenty flare protection.

There's no doubt that the L is still "the standard" of this zoom range. But IMO it isn't for its optics; it's for the other areas of build and refinement. The new Sigma is definitely a serious contender for those looking for a "bang for buck" lens. Optically, it's arguably second to none in this focal range.

Post #13, Jun 24, 2005 10:57:05




LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ W
Canon Fanosapien
Tom W's Avatar
Joined Feb 2003
12,743 posts
Chattanooga, Tennessee
[MORE/SHARE]

Nice test, fstop. I think that in terms of sharpness, the Sigma has a slight edge at 70, but it seems that the Canon holds the corners better at 24 mm. They are very close, though. The Sigma seems to have a little bit more fringing at 70/2.8, but not much. By f/5.6, they're both very good.

I think that the Canon exhibits a little bit more contrast, but this is hard to discern since even 1/10 of a stop of difference inexposure can give that appearance. And I'm not sure if more is better or not. Both are really looking good.

Good bokeh on both lenses - I don't seem to find the telltale Sigma color cast that I've seen in the past, though a complete, uncropped image with known colors would help there (of course, post-processing can usually take care of minor casts anyway).

Given that I like having 24 mm available, the Sigma would make a good alternative, if I didn't have a really nice Canon 24-70 in my possession already.

Post #14, Jun 24, 2005 10:58:11


Tom
5D III, 70D, & various lenses

LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ W
Canon Fanosapien
Tom W's Avatar
Joined Feb 2003
12,743 posts
Chattanooga, Tennessee
[MORE/SHARE]

In regards to the hood, JoJo, does the front element extend within the shroud of the hood on the Sigma, or is the hood attached to the front of the lens? Curious as I like that part of the Canon design where the angle of lens exposure changes with the focal length to provide deeper hood coverate at 70 mm while allowing wider views at 24 mm.

Also, is this Sigma a full-frame 35 mm lens?

Post #15, Jun 24, 2005 11:02:20


Tom
5D III, 70D, & various lenses

LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
55,463 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon & Sigma 24-70 f2.8 Test (merged)
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses



NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO FORUMS

CHANGE BODY TEXT SIZE FOR ALL THREAD PAGES
POWERED BY AMASS 1.0version 1.0
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net


SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF  |  JUMP TO FORUM...  |  FORUM RULES


Spent 0.00085 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
1035 guests, 877 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is Chubbyluck

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality, we do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browser's data storage methods.