Question From Newbie ???

I have a question for the board and I realize it may be a stupid question. I am just getting back in photography, although I was not that experienced anyway, and I look at the choice of all the lenses. I have read some really good and bad reviews on Canon's and Sigma's lenses. However if you have two lenses that are in the same class, ex. 24-70 mm f 2.8, where the Canon is several hundred dollars higher yet may or may not be a better lens than the Sigma then why pay the difference. I really don't understand why someone would or will pay such a huge difference when you can a lot of the time get the same quality picture. Can someone enlighten a dimwit like myself on this topic of third party lenses verses OEM lenses. Thanks for the help.

Larry

Because people like me are stupid j/k. All kidding aside, Canon L lenses tend to retain their value better than Sigmas....something to think about if you are the kind of person that likes to buy new lenses often.

If you don't plan on trading lenses then why not go with a third party mfg. Let me ask this is it like buying cars where you can purcahse a Dodge Viper for $$$$$$ versus a Ford Mustang? Where both do a great job of getting you around but the Viper looks so much better and may have a few more bells and whistles. If that makes sense.

It's case by case. For the 2470 lenses, the L costs over 3x more but gives you silent AF (ring USM), full time manual focusing (when you need it), better overall build, refinement, weathersealing, and guaranteed future compatibility with Canon bodies. But for my money, in THIS range, I would take the Sigma myself (and did for a long while). Optically it's top notch and for the $ it's amazing. There is no free lunch and the L is a "better" lens overall but it's not primarily for optics (in THIS case).

One thing I have noticed between the L lenses and all others is the richness of color you get from the lens. They may compare, to a certain point, in sharpness, but not in the color reproduction.

But Doc, don't most people photoshop a lot of their photographs anyway? So as far as richness of color are concerned that can be fixed. I mean am I wrong or right.

Since you are like me and have limited experience in photography, you will not notice a difference in the opitcal quality of the Sigma 24-70mm F2.8. Believe me, there will be so many things to screw up in the picture that a slight difference in color reproduction will not even be noticed.

Thanks 20D, I think I will go with the Sigma 20-70mm. Unless I someone can convince me to go with the Canon.

Too me, you would be better off with the Sigma 24-70mm and get another lens or a flash with the difference (if you really have the money to spend). Just test the Sigma 24-70mm when you get it. Sigma has mine right now because there was an issue with front focusing. I got mine from sigma4less.com. They have a really good price and great service.

Thanks again 20D I just went there and you can save about $30 verses B&H Photo.

it's not that simple. the third party lenses usually have some compromises. for instance, the tamron 28-75 is arguably as sharp as the canon 24-70L at a third of the price.

but the canon has superior color and ring USM and believe me you can't tweak a missed focus in PS. also the canon is 4mm wider (tho 5mm shorter) and for many that 4mm is crucial.

if you can live with these compromises heck yeah the tamron is a better deal plus the lens is much smaller and weighs almost half as much.

also, what may be acceptable to you now may not be so tomorrow or six months from now so while you may not plan on "trading" you have to at least consider it.

good luck!

ed rader

I have only bought one lens that was not a canon and I sold it within a week and said never again.

Hi Ed, thanks for the info however I wanted to make sure you were talking about the Sigma not the Tamron.

actually i was talking about third party lenses in general. i haven't used the sigma but i do own the tamron and these two lenses are often compared along with the canon 24-70L.

ed rader

But Ed, for someone just getting back into the swing of things would you spend three times the amount of money on the Canon. I mean will I be able to tell that much of a difference? I am not trying to argue it's just I am curious.