KEEP the sigma 20mm EX DG
OK, I picked up the siggy 20mm. Optically it's just as good as my 24L. Yes it's a tad slower (1.8 -vs- 1.4) but it's very good optically at f/2 (where I shoot). It's got the weird AF clutch issue but I can deal with that. It's a bit bigger:
it's AF is as good, just noisy, but it costs MUCH less.... So if I sold the L I could fund some other lenses I'm on the fence about. Which would you keep?
Canon 24mm L:
- + faster
- + smaller (this on a 5D/5Dii makes for a nice compact DSLR)
- + better build
- + quieter AF
- - more expensive
- - not as wide
- + wider
- + less expensive (~$850 to play with if I go this route)
- + just as good optically
- - slightly longer
- - noisy AF (but as fast/accurate)
- - weird clutch setup
- - EX DG build (good, but not great, paint will eventually flake)
- - 1.8 -vs- 1.4
I know just looking at those lists the L wins. But honestly most of the reasons for that don't effect the image (build and lenght). But in the end, is the money worth it for a lens I simply love? The 24L has been on my 5D (and not 5Dii) almost exclusively for my personal shots since I got it last march. We're talking over 4,000 images. I LOVE this lens. But I like wide primes, the 20 is wider, and just as good optically. Because it's wider it actually focuses easier at times (less distance to move the barrel). So is the nicer looking/feeling L worth keeping, or would you opt for the money?
If I sell the 24L, I'd buy either the sigma 12-24mm again or the 24-70 HSM or possibly fund a 1DII....
Another thing to consider is I've fallen in love with the wide prime feel and I'm considering getting a 1Dii. The 20mm would be ~26mm on the 1Dii which I'd still like. The 24L would be 31.2 which would be too tight for me (I didn't like the 28mm when I had it). Selling the 24L would get me a 1Dii sooner with a lens that would work better on it for me.
