24-70mm Lens

Hi there everyone,

I currently have a Canon 1D MKII with a 70-200 F4L and a 50 F1.8 and looking for a new lens to go with these.

I have hired a Canon 24-70mm a few times for weddings and thought it was great, my question is really is it worth waiting out for the canon version or is the Sigma version any good?

Also any other suggestions?


Phil

Sigma version is good... Not as good, but certainly not "bad"

Here is a comparison of the 24-70L vs the old Sigma 24-70/2.8; the new HSM model is supposed to be a lot sharper.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=4​&APIComp=0

I have the Sigma HSM version of this lens - I love it TONS. It's actually a very capable performer, and it's the backup to my Canon version. There are actually times I prefer the sigma, as it's lighter and smaller.

I can show you some samples if you'd like.

Zansho wrote in post #13297325
I can show you some samples if you'd like.

That'd be great if you didnt mind?

Here are a couple taken wide open with my older/non-USM version:

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/nowensby/609461​6911/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/nowensby/610448​4785/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/nowensby/610503​1884/

If you can try them side by side at a camera shop, it'll be easier to decide. I tried the Sigma USM a while ago and a few things bugged me. The zoom ring rotates in the opposite direction from Canon, the AF motor is noisy, and the focus wasn't as fast for me compared to the L. I felt I was missing shots during the day. Color and contrast weren't bad, but I did have to push up contrast more in post to try matching the look of my other lenses. I didn't have back focus issues with the Sigma, which is always a point of contention with the L.

Nobody knows when the second version of Canon 24-70mm is going to come out. You may have to wait for years before the new one comes out. And once it is announced, it'll take you another 6 months to a year before you can get your hands on it. And lastly, the cost will definitely increase on the new lens which hopefully will help with the resale value of the current lens.

People have been passing rumors of the new 24-70mm 2.8L IS II for years. Personally, I don't need IS on a lens like this since I'm shooting FF. Waiting for this lens is like waiting for the 2nd coming of Christ. Nobody knows when it is going to comes. If you need the 24-70 today, get what is available today.

I have both. You couldn't tell the difference. The focus on the Sigma 2.8 HSM is not in anyway noisy.

Purplecow wrote in post #13298022
Nobody knows when the second version of Canon 24-70mm is going to come out. You may have to wait for years before the new one comes out. And once it is announced, it'll take you another 6 months to a year before you can get your hands on it. And lastly, the cost will definitely increase on the new lens which hopefully will help with the resale value of the current lens.

People have been passing rumors of the new 24-70mm 2.8L IS II for years. Personally, I don't need IS on a lens like this since I'm shooting FF. Waiting for this lens is like waiting for the 2nd coming of Christ. Nobody knows when it is going to comes. If you need the 24-70 today, get what is available today.

What?? Why come out of left field and bring rumors into this thread? No one in this thread (except you) has mentioned anything about a 24-70LII

nrowensby wrote in post #13298069
What?? Why come out of left field and bring rumors into this thread? No one in this thread (except you) has mentioned anything about a 24-70LII

OP suggested:

It sounded like he wanted to wait for the future 24-70mm. Maybe it's British English? But why wait out for something unless he/she is expecting something to happen to it? Maybe I was breaking down his question a bit too much. Maybe others didn't notice the phrasing.

I think he probably meant waiting to accrue the additional funds the Canon will cost over the Sigma. I certainly didn't read it that he was waiting for a newer version of the Canon lens.

nrowensby wrote in post #13297301
Sigma version is good... Not as good, but certainly not "bad"

The Sigma has better center performance and is much more compact and lighter. The Canon has better corner performance, weather sealing and flare control by virtue of its huge hood. Otherwise, the lenses are about the same. Of course, Sigma wins the price ($500 cheaper) and warranty (4 years vs. 1 year).

Philco wrote in post #13297829
I tried the Sigma USM a while ago and a few things bugged me. The zoom ring rotates in the opposite direction from Canon, the AF motor is noisy, and the focus wasn't as fast for me compared to the L.

This is false. The Sigma HSM and Canon zoom in the same direction (24mm on the left, 70mm on the right). The HSM motor is silent and just as fast as the Canon.

Here are some samples taken with the Sigma:

Phil - The answer is very straightforward - if the you have the budget for a Canon 24-70, go for it. You won't be regretted. If you don't have budget for a Canon one, go with Sigma. It will do the job ok.

fourelements99 wrote in post #13303116
Phil - The answer is very straightforward - if the you have the budget for a Canon 24-70, go for it. You won't be regretted. If you don't have budget for a Canon one, go with Sigma. It will do the job ok.

I used them both and preferred the Sigma for its superior center performance. Unless you're out in the rain or snow, there's really no compelling reason to go for the Canon, IYAM.