October 23, 2014, 02:59:41 AM

Author Topic: Is it time to consider Sigma lenses seriously?? competitive to Canon?  (Read 35610 times)

rs

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 668
    • View Profile
Re: Is it time to consider Sigma lenses seriously?? competitive to Canon?
« Reply #90 on: August 14, 2013, 05:02:46 PM »
What negative experiences have you had with the Sigma 50/1.4 for you to be so vocally negative about it?

Never tried it for myself, never claimed I did...but have read what Lensrentals had to say, as well as the reviews...as well as Sigma's own MTF chart of the lens in their display of the product on their own website...which clearly shows a steep dropoff in sharpness in the image even before the aps-c crop ends...let alone to the corners on full frame.

http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/canon/lenses/normal-range/sigma-50mm-f1.4-dg-hsm-for-canon

"
Roger's Take

Roger Cicala

President of LensRentals.com

It’s become apparent through many tests and online forums that the Sigma 50 is a ‘special’ lens. I was glad to find this out because it was driving me nuts. It’s a very nice lens when you use it just right, with superb sharpness and smooth bokeh. But here’s the summary:

1) It works very well on crop frame cameras and at middle (5 to 15 feet) distance, so its a wonderful indoor lens.

2) On full frame cameras and to a slight extent on crop frame cameras, the lens exhibits what I will term ‘schizophrenic autofocus’: Closer than 5 feet it will front focus, further than 20 feet it will backfocus. This is not a calibration issue, its just how it is."


Apparently yours differs from the normal production?
There is a definite QC issue with this Sigma lens. I exchanged my first copy because it had terribly inaccurate AF. It showed signs of brilliance though because manually focusing it produced some amazing results. I was expecting a similarly bad experience with the second lens, but I was pleasantly surprised to find it is consistently accurate with its AF. I do admit this is performing beyond my expectations set by reading reviews, but I certainly can't complain about owning a lens this good.
5D II | 24-70 II | 70-200 II | 100L | 40 | Sigma 50/1.4 | 40D | 10-22 | 17-55 | 580 EX II | 1.4x TC II

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Is it time to consider Sigma lenses seriously?? competitive to Canon?
« Reply #90 on: August 14, 2013, 05:02:46 PM »

Policar

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 423
    • View Profile
Re: Is it time to consider Sigma lenses seriously?? competitive to Canon?
« Reply #91 on: August 14, 2013, 05:34:11 PM »
The 20mm f1.8 is the softest lens I've ever used (worse than the Nikon 24mm f2 AIS and much worse than the Rokinon 24mm f1.4, all wide open), whereas the 18-35mm f1.8 is one of the best. Oddly it won't autofocus properly on my old Digital Rebel XT, but on new cameras it's pretty accurate.

AF does seem to be an issue with Sigma lenses. My 50mm f1.4 is not very accurate with AF, but CarlTN must have a worse sample than I do by a lot to be so vocally negative about his experiences with it. It has amazing bokeh and is pretty sharp in the center, which is all that matters for that focal length and speed.

However, wide open the 50mm f1.8 Canon is my favorite lens I must admit. Just wish it had more aperture blades. It's sharp and so cute. That it's the best general-purpose 50mm available for Canon (excepting its awful bokeh) is kind of insane.

mrsfotografie

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1425
  • www.mrsfotografie.nl
    • View Profile
    • MRS fotografie
Re: Is it time to consider Sigma lenses seriously?? competitive to Canon?
« Reply #92 on: August 15, 2013, 01:16:46 AM »
The 20mm f1.8 is the softest lens I've ever used (worse than the Nikon 24mm f2 AIS and much worse than the Rokinon 24mm f1.4, all wide open), whereas the 18-35mm f1.8 is one of the best. Oddly it won't autofocus properly on my old Digital Rebel XT, but on new cameras it's pretty accurate.

AF does seem to be an issue with Sigma lenses. My 50mm f1.4 is not very accurate with AF, but CarlTN must have a worse sample than I do by a lot to be so vocally negative about his experiences with it. It has amazing bokeh and is pretty sharp in the center, which is all that matters for that focal length and speed.

However, wide open the 50mm f1.8 Canon is my favorite lens I must admit. Just wish it had more aperture blades. It's sharp and so cute. That it's the best general-purpose 50mm available for Canon (excepting its awful bokeh) is kind of insane.

Wide open, the 20mm may be soft BUT it's the only 20mm f/1.8 prime for full frame - a unique lens. Stopped down a little it gives stunning results. It's an older lens in the Sigma line-up, like the 50 mm so does not have the same type of quality assurance as the newer models - the old hit and miss may apply here but I've got excellent copies of both these lenses. Now the 30mm f/1.4 I owned previously was absolutely a dud; no sharp images with AF, soft wide open and a 'dragging' noise in the focus ring. I still loved it at the time for its format and dreamy bokeh but it was as unreliable as a lens can get.
5D3, 5D2, Sony α6000, G16 | SY14 f/2.8, Ʃ20 f/1.8, 24 f/2.8, 35 f/2, Ʃ35 f/1.4A, 50 f/1.8 I, Ʃ50 f/1.4 EX, 100L Macro, 17-40L, 24-105L, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, 1.4x II, 70-300L, 100-400L | E-mount: SY12 f/2, Ʃ19 & 30 f/2.8 EX DN, 16-70 ZA OSS, 55-210 OSS, Metabones SB | FT-QL, AE-1P | FD(n) & FL lenses

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Is it time to consider Sigma lenses seriously?? competitive to Canon?
« Reply #93 on: August 15, 2013, 01:31:39 AM »
What negative experiences have you had with the Sigma 50/1.4 for you to be so vocally negative about it?

Never tried it for myself, never claimed I did...but have read what Lensrentals had to say, as well as the reviews...as well as Sigma's own MTF chart of the lens in their display of the product on their own website...which clearly shows a steep dropoff in sharpness in the image even before the aps-c crop ends...let alone to the corners on full frame.

http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/canon/lenses/normal-range/sigma-50mm-f1.4-dg-hsm-for-canon

"
Roger's Take

Roger Cicala

President of LensRentals.com

It’s become apparent through many tests and online forums that the Sigma 50 is a ‘special’ lens. I was glad to find this out because it was driving me nuts. It’s a very nice lens when you use it just right, with superb sharpness and smooth bokeh. But here’s the summary:

1) It works very well on crop frame cameras and at middle (5 to 15 feet) distance, so its a wonderful indoor lens.

2) On full frame cameras and to a slight extent on crop frame cameras, the lens exhibits what I will term ‘schizophrenic autofocus’: Closer than 5 feet it will front focus, further than 20 feet it will backfocus. This is not a calibration issue, its just how it is."


Apparently yours differs from the normal production?
There is a definite QC issue with this Sigma lens. I exchanged my first copy because it had terribly inaccurate AF. It showed signs of brilliance though because manually focusing it produced some amazing results. I was expecting a similarly bad experience with the second lens, but I was pleasantly surprised to find it is consistently accurate with its AF. I do admit this is performing beyond my expectations set by reading reviews, but I certainly can't complain about owning a lens this good.

Well I am glad to hear that.  I own the Cosina Voigtlander 58mm f/1.4, and I absolutely love it, even though it's a manual Nikon-mount lens.  It very well could be the sharpest 50mm f/1.4 lens.  Its bokeh isn't exactly perfect, but is more than smooth enough for me.  The only other fast lenses I want now are a 24mm and an 85, or preferably a 95 f/1.0...Sigma needs to make one!

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Is it time to consider Sigma lenses seriously?? competitive to Canon?
« Reply #94 on: August 15, 2013, 01:35:21 AM »
The 20mm f1.8 is the softest lens I've ever used (worse than the Nikon 24mm f2 AIS and much worse than the Rokinon 24mm f1.4, all wide open), whereas the 18-35mm f1.8 is one of the best. Oddly it won't autofocus properly on my old Digital Rebel XT, but on new cameras it's pretty accurate.

AF does seem to be an issue with Sigma lenses. My 50mm f1.4 is not very accurate with AF, but CarlTN must have a worse sample than I do by a lot to be so vocally negative about his experiences with it. It has amazing bokeh and is pretty sharp in the center, which is all that matters for that focal length and speed.

However, wide open the 50mm f1.8 Canon is my favorite lens I must admit. Just wish it had more aperture blades. It's sharp and so cute. That it's the best general-purpose 50mm available for Canon (excepting its awful bokeh) is kind of insane.

I never claimed I owned that Sigma.  I have owned the Canon f/1.8 in the past.  It was fine for the money.  I like the 40mm f/2.8 pancake a lot more.  I've owned other Sigma lenses, and own one of their telephoto zooms now.  It is quite nice.  The only time I've been published, the image was shot with an older Sigma 17-70 on my old 50D...

I am far from biased against Sigma.

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Is it time to consider Sigma lenses seriously?? competitive to Canon?
« Reply #95 on: August 15, 2013, 01:41:06 AM »
The 20mm f1.8 is the softest lens I've ever used (worse than the Nikon 24mm f2 AIS and much worse than the Rokinon 24mm f1.4, all wide open), whereas the 18-35mm f1.8 is one of the best. Oddly it won't autofocus properly on my old Digital Rebel XT, but on new cameras it's pretty accurate.

AF does seem to be an issue with Sigma lenses. My 50mm f1.4 is not very accurate with AF, but CarlTN must have a worse sample than I do by a lot to be so vocally negative about his experiences with it. It has amazing bokeh and is pretty sharp in the center, which is all that matters for that focal length and speed.

However, wide open the 50mm f1.8 Canon is my favorite lens I must admit. Just wish it had more aperture blades. It's sharp and so cute. That it's the best general-purpose 50mm available for Canon (excepting its awful bokeh) is kind of insane.

Wide open, the 20mm may be soft BUT it's the only 20mm f/1.8 prime for full frame - a unique lens. Stopped down a little it gives stunning results. It's an older lens in the Sigma line-up, like the 50 mm so does not have the same type of quality assurance as the newer models - the old hit and miss may apply here but I've got excellent copies of both these lenses. Now the 30mm f/1.4 I owned previously was absolutely a dud; no sharp images with AF, soft wide open and a 'dragging' noise in the focus ring. I still loved it at the time for its format and dreamy bokeh but it was as unreliable as a lens can get.

I rented the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 back in 2009.  It may have been a bit better sample than the one you describe above.  I recall its AF was a bit hit or miss, and certainly it had a curved plane of focus...but then so does my Voigtlander 58mm...it's just a lot closer to flat.  I loved the color from that 30mm Sigma...

They have a new 30mm f/1.4 for aps-c...not sure how much better it is than the old one.  I have no doubt it is better, though.  As for the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 being "old", the design is quite a bit newer than the 20mm f/1.8.  I believe the Sigma 50mm came out in '07 or '08?  Not sure...might have been '09.  The 20mm came out in the early to mid 2000's...or else in the '90's...not sure.  That narrows it down for you doesn't it?

mrsfotografie

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1425
  • www.mrsfotografie.nl
    • View Profile
    • MRS fotografie
Re: Is it time to consider Sigma lenses seriously?? competitive to Canon?
« Reply #96 on: August 15, 2013, 11:06:13 AM »
The 20mm f1.8 is the softest lens I've ever used (worse than the Nikon 24mm f2 AIS and much worse than the Rokinon 24mm f1.4, all wide open), whereas the 18-35mm f1.8 is one of the best. Oddly it won't autofocus properly on my old Digital Rebel XT, but on new cameras it's pretty accurate.

AF does seem to be an issue with Sigma lenses. My 50mm f1.4 is not very accurate with AF, but CarlTN must have a worse sample than I do by a lot to be so vocally negative about his experiences with it. It has amazing bokeh and is pretty sharp in the center, which is all that matters for that focal length and speed.

However, wide open the 50mm f1.8 Canon is my favorite lens I must admit. Just wish it had more aperture blades. It's sharp and so cute. That it's the best general-purpose 50mm available for Canon (excepting its awful bokeh) is kind of insane.

Wide open, the 20mm may be soft BUT it's the only 20mm f/1.8 prime for full frame - a unique lens. Stopped down a little it gives stunning results. It's an older lens in the Sigma line-up, like the 50 mm so does not have the same type of quality assurance as the newer models - the old hit and miss may apply here but I've got excellent copies of both these lenses. Now the 30mm f/1.4 I owned previously was absolutely a dud; no sharp images with AF, soft wide open and a 'dragging' noise in the focus ring. I still loved it at the time for its format and dreamy bokeh but it was as unreliable as a lens can get.

I rented the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 back in 2009.  It may have been a bit better sample than the one you describe above.  I recall its AF was a bit hit or miss, and certainly it had a curved plane of focus...but then so does my Voigtlander 58mm...it's just a lot closer to flat.  I loved the color from that 30mm Sigma...

They have a new 30mm f/1.4 for aps-c...not sure how much better it is than the old one.  I have no doubt it is better, though.  As for the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 being "old", the design is quite a bit newer than the 20mm f/1.8.  I believe the Sigma 50mm came out in '07 or '08?  Not sure...might have been '09.  The 20mm came out in the early to mid 2000's...or else in the '90's...not sure.  That narrows it down for you doesn't it?

I'm sure my '30' was an outlier, on the bad side. The 20 and 50 I love, but I'm hesitant to get the 35 too; it's absolutely fabulous from what I've read, but at the moment I can't justify the price for the occasional use it'll get. Maybe when the days shorten and light gets dim I'll reconsider...
5D3, 5D2, Sony α6000, G16 | SY14 f/2.8, Ʃ20 f/1.8, 24 f/2.8, 35 f/2, Ʃ35 f/1.4A, 50 f/1.8 I, Ʃ50 f/1.4 EX, 100L Macro, 17-40L, 24-105L, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, 1.4x II, 70-300L, 100-400L | E-mount: SY12 f/2, Ʃ19 & 30 f/2.8 EX DN, 16-70 ZA OSS, 55-210 OSS, Metabones SB | FT-QL, AE-1P | FD(n) & FL lenses

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Is it time to consider Sigma lenses seriously?? competitive to Canon?
« Reply #96 on: August 15, 2013, 11:06:13 AM »

GMCPhotographics

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 728
    • View Profile
    • GMCPhotographics
Re: Is it time to consider Sigma lenses seriously?? competitive to Canon?
« Reply #97 on: August 15, 2013, 12:50:38 PM »
These days, everyone expects a lot more out of pro lenses than they did even 5 years ago. If Sigma had made their current range 5 years ago, with the proper service levels, they would have a much larger market share.
In that respect, they are a little late to the party but most welcome anyhow! 

Who would have expected Sigma to crack out a fantastic 35mm f1.4? Or their 50mm?

No one has made the definitive 50mm fast prime on the Canon mount yet. Sigma are close but the Canon 50mm f1.2 L still is a peerless but faulted king. This should not be!

It would be wise for Sigma to build a 500mm f4 lens which is light and can take 1.4 and 2x TC's....while being sharp and with excellent AF abilities.
 

surapon

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2312
  • 80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
    • View Profile
Re: Is it time to consider Sigma lenses seriously?? competitive to Canon?
« Reply #98 on: August 15, 2013, 02:23:49 PM »
Dear Friends.
I am sorry to Answer the Sigma Lens  Question, Which I have the Fist Sigma Lens in my Life ( And Seem to get the Best one from The Batch/ From MFG. too)---Yes, Some time, My Friends who have Sigma Lens Complaint about  Sigma Lens for Canon have a slow or Miss AF---But May be the Quality control of Their MFG. And more than 5 years ago, One of my Dear Friend from Japan, The Optical Engineer, Who work for Canon, he told me that, Sigma company try to save their money, not to buy the Patent of AF/ EOS from Canon, But They Use Reverse Engineer to Make their Lens work with Canon EOS, Yes Tamron Company Buy the AF / EOS patent from Canon, and  have a great AF to Match Canon too----Sorry, That is the Truth or not, Or Just Canon Company try to make me Feel Good ???, and  Want Me to buy only Canon Lenses.
Sorry again that I start to Make two fan Clubs= Ford and Chevy , try to tell another side that their truck a lot better than  another brand name Truck.
Yes, If Your AF. ( for Canon EOS Body) of Sigma Lens are not Perfect, Please try to Adjust the Back Focus/ AF. Microadjustment = C. FN III-8.
Yes, Sigma 50 mm. F/ 1.4 ( $ 460 US Dollars), are not Perfected Lens as Canon EF 50. MM. F/ 1.2 L ( $ 1600 US Dollars), But I need a Good Lens for 50 mm, and Save some money to buy Canon Lens  EF 1200 mm ( $ 120,000 US Dollars)---That is my Dream before I die ( my Wife might Kill me---Ha, Ha, Ha ).---JUST KIDDING.
I am very glad to be your friend in  CR. Yes, I read most of your Answers and Learn  a lot of Things = New infor/ New Ideas  from you.
Thousand Thanks.
Surapon.
Apex, NC., USA.

Here are the comparision Between Canon 50 mm, F/ 1.4 and Sigma 50 mm f/ 1.4---Just move your mouse to left and right , to see the difference.


http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=115&Camera=453&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=473&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

« Last Edit: August 15, 2013, 04:10:30 PM by surapon »

roadrunner

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 74
    • View Profile
Re: Is it time to consider Sigma lenses seriously?? competitive to Canon?
« Reply #99 on: August 17, 2013, 05:40:18 AM »
I think Sigma should have always been taken seriously. Don't get me wrong, I've never wanted a sigma lens prior to the art 35mm (Which I now own) as I would prefer Canon, but that doesn't mean I didn't take Sigma seriously. I seriously considered a couple of their lenses. Mainly the 50mm f1.4 and the 150mm 2.8 OS Macro lens.

In the end, I didn't want to struggle with the QC issues of the Sigma 50mm (Though, by most accounts, it is the better lens on paper when compared to Canon's offerings) and I wanted the weather sealing, smaller, lighter 100mm Macro L. So I have always seriously considered Sigma, I just never actually chose them until the current 35mm. I am definitely looking forward to an art version of their 50mm though.

GMCPhotographics

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 728
    • View Profile
    • GMCPhotographics
Re: Is it time to consider Sigma lenses seriously?? competitive to Canon?
« Reply #100 on: September 05, 2013, 11:02:45 AM »
I think Sigma should have always been taken seriously. Don't get me wrong, I've never wanted a sigma lens prior to the art 35mm (Which I now own) as I would prefer Canon, but that doesn't mean I didn't take Sigma seriously. I seriously considered a couple of their lenses. Mainly the 50mm f1.4 and the 150mm 2.8 OS Macro lens.

In the end, I didn't want to struggle with the QC issues of the Sigma 50mm (Though, by most accounts, it is the better lens on paper when compared to Canon's offerings) and I wanted the weather sealing, smaller, lighter 100mm Macro L. So I have always seriously considered Sigma, I just never actually chose them until the current 35mm. I am definitely looking forward to an art version of their 50mm though.

A number of years ago I compared my then new Siggi 70-200 f2.8 DG EX HSM to a friends Canon 70-200 LIS. I was thrilled with my lens until I compared it and on every point, the Canon was slightly better (ignoring the excellent IS unit). It was better built, has a paint finish which didn't flake off, it's AF was faster and more accurate and it was sharper wide open and 200mm. It handled flare way better and was loser to the 200mm stated than the quite obviously shorter Sigma (around 185mm by my estimations). While the Sigma was a very good lens, the Canon was superior in every aspect except cost and weight. The AF considerations were considerable too...what's the point of a sharp lens if it's AF is inconsistent?

I have a soft spot for Sigma, I like their lenses a lot. But in a fair Sigma to Canon comparision, the Canon lenses are generally better in most regards. That said, there's a lot to like about the new Siggi 35mm f1.4..but then again, I've been using the Canon variant for the last 6 years and it's a very special optic. 

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Is it time to consider Sigma lenses seriously?? competitive to Canon?
« Reply #101 on: September 05, 2013, 03:52:19 PM »

I'm sure my '30' was an outlier, on the bad side. The 20 and 50 I love, but I'm hesitant to get the 35 too; it's absolutely fabulous from what I've read, but at the moment I can't justify the price for the occasional use it'll get. Maybe when the days shorten and light gets dim I'll reconsider...

I feel the exact same way about the Sigma 35 as you do...

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Is it time to consider Sigma lenses seriously?? competitive to Canon?
« Reply #102 on: September 05, 2013, 03:53:26 PM »
These days, everyone expects a lot more out of pro lenses than they did even 5 years ago. If Sigma had made their current range 5 years ago, with the proper service levels, they would have a much larger market share.
In that respect, they are a little late to the party but most welcome anyhow! 

Who would have expected Sigma to crack out a fantastic 35mm f1.4? Or their 50mm?

No one has made the definitive 50mm fast prime on the Canon mount yet. Sigma are close but the Canon 50mm f1.2 L still is a peerless but faulted king. This should not be!

It would be wise for Sigma to build a 500mm f4 lens which is light and can take 1.4 and 2x TC's....while being sharp and with excellent AF abilities.

Nice to see Sigma enthusiasm like this!

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Is it time to consider Sigma lenses seriously?? competitive to Canon?
« Reply #102 on: September 05, 2013, 03:53:26 PM »

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Is it time to consider Sigma lenses seriously?? competitive to Canon?
« Reply #103 on: September 05, 2013, 03:57:29 PM »
I think Sigma should have always been taken seriously. Don't get me wrong, I've never wanted a sigma lens prior to the art 35mm (Which I now own) as I would prefer Canon, but that doesn't mean I didn't take Sigma seriously. I seriously considered a couple of their lenses. Mainly the 50mm f1.4 and the 150mm 2.8 OS Macro lens.

In the end, I didn't want to struggle with the QC issues of the Sigma 50mm (Though, by most accounts, it is the better lens on paper when compared to Canon's offerings) and I wanted the weather sealing, smaller, lighter 100mm Macro L. So I have always seriously considered Sigma, I just never actually chose them until the current 35mm. I am definitely looking forward to an art version of their 50mm though.

A number of years ago I compared my then new Siggi 70-200 f2.8 DG EX HSM to a friends Canon 70-200 LIS. I was thrilled with my lens until I compared it and on every point, the Canon was slightly better (ignoring the excellent IS unit). It was better built, has a paint finish which didn't flake off, it's AF was faster and more accurate and it was sharper wide open and 200mm. It handled flare way better and was loser to the 200mm stated than the quite obviously shorter Sigma (around 185mm by my estimations). While the Sigma was a very good lens, the Canon was superior in every aspect except cost and weight. The AF considerations were considerable too...what's the point of a sharp lens if it's AF is inconsistent?

I have a soft spot for Sigma, I like their lenses a lot. But in a fair Sigma to Canon comparision, the Canon lenses are generally better in most regards. That said, there's a lot to like about the new Siggi 35mm f1.4..but then again, I've been using the Canon variant for the last 6 years and it's a very special optic.

No doubt Canon will eventually answer Sigma's 35mm "art" lens, but they have other higher priorities.  I certainly want to buy the Sigma, especially to use for fall foliage, but am weighing my options...because I also want something a bit wider and something a bit more telephoto...

tron

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1860
    • View Profile
Re: Is it time to consider Sigma lenses seriously?? competitive to Canon?
« Reply #104 on: September 05, 2013, 04:32:18 PM »
[weighing my options...because I also want something a bit wider and something a bit more telephoto...
Hmmm a bit weider? hmmm how about 24mm, hmmm a bit more telephoto how about 70mm, 24 70 24 70 ohhh wait 24-70 28L II  :o

Unless you want a 24 1.4L II and an 851.2L II  8)

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Is it time to consider Sigma lenses seriously?? competitive to Canon?
« Reply #104 on: September 05, 2013, 04:32:18 PM »