Sigma 24-70 2.8 hsm vs Canon L

[neuroanatomist]

unless you mean a step up ring?

No it's a step down ring

Po-tay-to, po-tah-to.   

The terminology does vary, which is an unfortunate confusion.  For example, even though B&H calls the B+W 72→77mm (lens-to-filter) adapter a step-up ring, Ace Photo Digital, and many other vendors, call the exact same item a step-down ring.  In this case, B&H is actually mislabeling the product - the manufacturer's website (Schneider Optics, the parent company of B+W) calls it a stepdown ring, with the description, "Allows you to attach a 77mm filter to a lens with a 72mm front thread," and consistent with that, the box that mine came in was labeled "Reduzierung" (German for "reduction").  If an in ordnung German company like Schnieder Optics calls a 72→77mm 'stepdown' then 'step up' is probably the correct terminology for an adapter than allows you to put a 77mm filter on an 82mm filter thread - but as I stated, it's semantics (although it led to some confusion in this case).

It varies from lens to lens I suppose... for instance there are some lenses which i've heard can give vignetting just putting on a regular filter, hence why they sell low profile filters...

I agree that mechanical vignetting is lens specific, and you can't predict just based on the focal length(s).  For example, I'd have thought that the EF-S 10-22mm would be at risk at the wide end, since it's got an image circle designed for APS-C cameras (no sweet spot) and it already has almost 1.5 stops of optical vignetting.  Accordingly, I got a slim UV filter (B+W XS-Pro mount) for the lens.  However, a while back I did some testing and found that I could stack a standard mount (F-Pro) filter and a slim mount filter onto the lens, and still not get any mechanical vignetting.   That test showed me that I could stack a slim CPL onto an XS-Pro UV filter if I was in a hurry.

I might have to give this type of test another try with some lenses on a FF body (especially lenses like the 16-35mm f/2.8L II and 35mm f/1.4L).

[infilm]

I say, buy the best and cry once.... The Sigma is less money for a reason, less quality. I have the 24-70L and its a great lens. Do yourself a favor, just go out and buy the Canon L....

[kirillica]

I say, buy the best and cry once.... The Sigma is less money for a reason, less quality. I have the 24-70L and its a great lens. Do yourself a favor, just go out and buy the Canon L....

+1 to your carma. Price difference is not only because Canon likes your money. Yes, they like it for sure. But they can produce an excellent stuff too.

[puqq]

A lot of us help high hopes for this lens, but alas it has failed to deliver.  On the Photozone test vignetting was so bad it was even apparant at f/8! Resolution fall off at the borders & corners is also particularly bad, even the Bokeh was criticised.

The Canon version is by no means perfect, with its field curvature issues, and especially with a new one rumoured for so long.

By far the worst part of the Sigma offering is the price at £650 it just doesn't offer enough of a saving over the £1000 the Canon costs, and then there's the second user market where prices are quite a bit less.

If you can get another 6 months out of the current lens then I'd say it'd be better than trying to make a choice at the present time.

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/527-sigma2470f28eos
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/528-canon2470f28ff
(both on 5D)

In short, Sigma shines in the sharpness of the centre of the frame. Everything else is quite bad. Have you given Tamron 28-75mm a thought?

[infilm]

@puqq,

Enough said....

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=372&Camera=9&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=101&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

At least in this test the Canon destroys the Sigma, once again the proverb proves itself..... Buy the best, cry once.

[Forceflow]

Normally I am a Sigma fan, but the 24-70 was disappointing. First one I tried had a misaligned focus. It wasn't that bad, but it sure wasn't great either. Microadjusting was not an option since it was too far in front at 24 and too far back at 70. I had it for roughly a week and did some real life shooting and I felt there were too many misses for my taste. Second one I tried was broken, had a serious AF issue. (Kept stuttering, the guy in the store said he had never seen anything like it)
Since the store I bought the lens at had given me the option to upgrade to Canon's 24-70 for two weeks after getting the Sigma lens I bit the bullet, paid the price difference and now own my first L lens. I did a few test shots that turned out nice (focus appears to be right on target) but sadly couldn't do a real life test shoot yet. But from what I have seen so far the Canon does outperform the Sigma. Not to mention that Canon's version has much better macro capability and also fits a 77mm filter. (Which is important for the ring flash that I use)

[GMCPhotographics]

I find that Sigma's HSM system is fast but less accurate that Canon's USM/FTM system. I found the lens hood to be vastly inferior to both the Canon and Nikkor versions. Flare was a major issue compared to Canon, I get big red blobs on bright sunny days (1/4 frame), where as the Canon only had a little ghosting that can look quite nice. I think that there is little optically between them in real world sharpness. There's often a colour cast with Sigma lenses that's apparent when comparing with simular shot taken with Canon glass. The Sigma has better stopped down sunstars (if that's your thing) but the Canon is weather resistant and probably one of Canon's most well engineered lens. It's called a brick for good reason and I wonder how long a Sigma would work for you when you have already broken one Canon copy. Buy cheap and you buy twice, my Sigma lenses have had a far less reliability than any of my Canon kit. My Sigma 12-24 EX DG HSM has been back to Sigma three times in 6 years due to various mechanical failures...which is scary. Most of the time this lens sits in my camera bag along with all my other Canon glass and so far I've not had any issues with the Canon lenses alongside it.
I used to like Sigma glass, but I lost faith in them about 3 years ago. They simply don't make professional grade robust gear. Nice for amatures and people who are prepared to put up with Sigma issues, while consoling themselves that they have saved a few pounds, shilling and pence.

[Joseph]

My trusty Canon 24-70l has finally succumbed to my abuse. Wondering if anyone has much real life experience with the Sigma HSM version?  Would love to save a few $ if comparable, but can't afford to sacrifice too much IQ.

I own a Canon 24-70mm 2.8L and have lots of experience with it. A couple of my friends bought the Sigma 24-70 , and I decided to do a comparison. Zoom ring was definitely smoother on my Canon , not a big deal , but I like mine much better. Canons auto focus was noticably quicker in most standard lit situations , however , the Sigma seemed to focus just as quickly in low light. Now sharpness , one of the Sigmas I tested was very sharp , close to my Canon , but when I played with my other friends it seemed to be a hair off. The one that was sharp , had a little bit more fringing than my Canon. I noticed a little less contrast in both the Sigmas , but that can be easily fixed.

Overall I was impressed by the much cheaper Sigma model - but I will stick with my Canon since I want the best I can get for it's price range - if I could not afford another Canon , the Sigma would be my next choice though.

[savale]

I had the cheaper tamron 28-75. It was quite good, but too soft for my taste on the 5d2. I also had the canon 24-70. It's a bit better, but still too soft. I can't believe the sigma is any better...? Now I'm into prime lenses <3

[Cornershot]

Look at it this way. If you're already familiar with and happy with the quality of your 24-70L, you won't have any regrets buying a new one. Good IQ is the cost of running a business. But the Sigma may disappoint, and you won't save that much to boot. 

[scottsdaleriots]

i was thinking of saving some $$$ and buying the sigma equivalent but now after reading what everyone else has said i think i'll just wait (a long time) for the 24-70mm II (really hoping it has IS)

[necator]

Consider also the old Sigma 24-70 EX DG (however not produced anymore?).

I have access to both, the Canon 24-70 and the Sigma 24-70 EX DG.

Sigma has on the 5D mk I and a 1Ds mk II a better resolution and less CA. Sigma however has problems wth AF at 70mm.
Canon has the better ergonomics and faster AF, less thendency to flare.

But, fact is also: Sigma has quite a problem with sample variation.
(Oh, Canon sometimes also has: I'm just into buying a Canon 50mm 1.4, and got already two lemons (really _bad_ ones).

[SpeechLess]

@puqq,

Enough said....

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=372&Camera=9&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=101&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

At least in this test the Canon destroys the Sigma, once again the proverb proves itself..... Buy the best, cry once.

That's the older sigma without HSM! I really would like to see a comparison like this with this newer HSM Sigma...

[kevl]

@puqq,

Enough said....

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=372&Camera=9&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=101&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

At least in this test the Canon destroys the Sigma, once again the proverb proves itself..... Buy the best, cry once.

That's the older sigma without HSM! I really would like to see a comparison like this with this newer HSM Sigma...

I have the new IF EX DG sigma 24-70 and I can tell you it is a very very nice lens! It is a completely different animal to the older version.

Kev

[00Q]

I had a few copies of the Sigma 24-70 MACRO EX DG lens. One of them was pretty good optically. Very sharp.

However, I hated the feel of the lens on the body. When it focuses, it pumps some air in/out of the body like an air gun. I didn't like that very much. And the zoom ring didnt feel the nice to use, as it's a bit too large diameter wise.

In general, shooting experiece with the canon is much better. I sold them and now I shoot with the canon.

there's an new Sigma 24-70 that is internal focusing (IF). It is much more expensive than the old sigma, but at that price, you might as well get a second hand canon instead.