new 70-200 vs sigma 24-70 sharpness

hey everyone.i just did a quick test with my new 70-200 is 2.8 mark 2 and I was expecting more then what I got.the image stabilization is great but it seems like my sigma is almost as sharp with a fraction of the price.if I add just a bit of sharpness I dont think there will be a whole lot of diffidence.Im shooting with a 40d.do I have a damaged lens?

this is 100% crop

two totally different lenses. compare the 24-70 to another 24-70, and a 70-200 to another 70-200.

the sigma is a great lens (I own it) but you can't shoot further than 70mm with it. Why would you compare two entirely different lenses against each other?

agreed... apples to oranges

true.I just wanted to see what an L lens can do but I guess it all deppends.this might be a stupid question but are shorter lenses usually a bit more sharp then longer lenses?

Which one is which?

The one on the right is sigma left is canon

How close were you ? I haven't shot my 70-200 near it's MFD but, I believe the MK1 was not great at its MFD.

pretty close.maybe thats the case

ive also noticed sigma lets in more light then canon.maybe im just used to the sigma but im a little disappointed with canon

I would say that's more than acceptable sharpness. At MFD most lenses are at their weakest. Sharpness is pretty close. The Sigma looks to have more contrast. Still, it's an apples to apples comparison. It looks as if the two lenses will compliment each other well.