Weddings and Sigma lenses

I may consider buying one of the Sigma lenses - 24-70 or 70-200 - for some upcoming weddings. The main reason is the price difference between them and the Canon L glass at f/2.8.

Would you mind posting some examples of pics taken with either Sigma lens.
Thank you,

I started out with a Sigma 28-70 2.8. It rendered some nice sharp images and colors were also nice. The problem I had with mine, and the reason I switched to canon brand, were build quality (I went through two sigma 28-70's in less than a year,) and focusing (They hunt a lot more than canons do in low light situations.) Just my experience with them. Great lenses for the buck, but I wouldn't want to shoot a dimly lit wedding with one again.

I currently use a Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 for wedding work - it does hunt alot to get focus...

Yet it has yielded some incredible images for me! Def worth it for a person on a limited budget

Definitely both worth it, although that 24-70 is frigging massive.

Try renting one first. I rented a Sigma 70-200 2.8 and was very pleased with the pics I got. Better than buying and finding out you made a huge mistake.

I also have a Sigma 28-105 zoom that I use all the time.

I only use Sigma for right now. You can view my website in my signature and see pictures taken with the lens.

I started with the Sigma 24-70 and love the lens. But not for weddings. I decided to get the Canon because of speed. I don't mean 2.8. I mean getting the shot. If the Sigma goes out of focus for any reason, it seems like ages before it gets back. The Canon is lightning fast compared to the Sigma. The sigma is just slightly warmer, but I don't think its enough to be concerned with. I also have better edge to edge sharpness with the Canon. But maybe that was my copies. So non-wedding, I think the Sigma is a great alternative to the expensive Canon.

twinsrus wrote in post #4022186
I also have a Sigma 28-105 zoom that I use all the time.

I've been keeping my eye on this obsolete lens. At least the 2.8 version. Do you have the 2.8 version? Can you post some shots?

The Sigma 24-70 lacks the high speed focusing of the Canon, and it's quiet noisy. That being said, the images are sharp enough - it's just more work getting the shot and there's less guarantee that you will get the shot. I keep one in my bag as a back up...you never know when the Canon one will go all out of whack.

sorry don't have either lens, but i did use a sigma 17-70 at a wedding over the weekend. really happy with my sigmas. here's a pic if it helps. i'm still a newbie, but i like this pic...

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

I had the Sigma 70-200 2.8. I actually found it focused very fast and was very sharp. But I needed the IS of the Canon.