Quoted excerpt from their conclusion:
".. the Sigma has more uniform performance overall, including superior control of CA and distortion. It’s a worthy addition to the range and will only add to the maker’s reputation. Plus at around half the price of the Canon.."
www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Sigma-24mm-F1.4-DG-HSM-A-Canon-EF-review-Better-by-design/Conclusion
Sounds like Sigma's gonna show the OEMs how to make mainstream lenses and leave Canon to what they're really good at, niche products.
Apparently Sigma's patented a 400/2.8 as well. Last time I spoke to a Sigma rep they sounded like they were gonna put more effort into primes.
I've only purchased one MFT Sigma prime, the 60mm f/2.8. it's a smokin' hot performance for $200!
EDIT; yup, if you need to shoot a 24mm wide open, the Sigma wins. by f/2.8 they're about the same for sharpness. Could use some bokeh comparison tho. :-\
".. the Sigma has more uniform performance overall, including superior control of CA and distortion. It’s a worthy addition to the range and will only add to the maker’s reputation. Plus at around half the price of the Canon.."
www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Sigma-24mm-F1.4-DG-HSM-A-Canon-EF-review-Better-by-design/Conclusion
Sounds like Sigma's gonna show the OEMs how to make mainstream lenses and leave Canon to what they're really good at, niche products.
Apparently Sigma's patented a 400/2.8 as well. Last time I spoke to a Sigma rep they sounded like they were gonna put more effort into primes.
I've only purchased one MFT Sigma prime, the 60mm f/2.8. it's a smokin' hot performance for $200!
EDIT; yup, if you need to shoot a 24mm wide open, the Sigma wins. by f/2.8 they're about the same for sharpness. Could use some bokeh comparison tho. :-\