which Sigma lens is more superior than the L?

[jonathann]

I have seen reviews that the 24-70mm EX has far more superior IQ than the L.

I am looking to get a Sigma 70-200 or a 80-400. How does the IQ of the 70-200 EX & 80-400 EX compared against 70-200 f2.8L IS and the 100-400mm L lens?

[sfoto100]

I have seen reviews that the 24-70mm EX has far more superior IQ than the L.

I am looking to get a Sigma 70-200 or a 80-400. How does the IQ of the 70-200 EX & 80-400 EX compared against 70-200 f2.8L IS and the 100-400mm L lens?

acc to photozone.de , the tamron 70-200 f/2.8 has better IQ than the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 (old one). but now sigma will release a new 70-700 f2.8 with OS... u can check the review of it in the future...

i am waiting for sigma 85mm... hope they will be better and better... it is good for us...

[myjunk]

Sigma 50mm f1.4

[jonathann]

acc to photozone.de , the tamron 70-200 f/2.8 has better IQ than the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 (old one). but now sigma will release a new 70-700 f2.8 with OS... u can check the review of it in the future...

i am waiting for sigma 85mm... hope they will be better and better... it is good for us...

ya but the new Sigma with OS is very exp. just slightly couple of hundreds cheaper than the L. and the new Canon 70-200L IS II IQ is really amazing. i wonder how is the new Sigma 70-200mm gonna compare against the Canon.

[DarkPa1adin]

acc to photozone.de , the tamron 70-200 f/2.8 has better IQ than the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 (old one). but now sigma will release a new 70-700 f2.8 with OS... u can check the review of it in the future...

i am waiting for sigma 85mm... hope they will be better and better... it is good for us...

Sigma 50mm f1.4

, i'm waiting too. for 85mm. I think sigma primes for portrait is better than L.

[sfoto100]

, i'm waiting too. for 85mm. I think sigma primes for portrait is better than L.

if i rem correctly , sigma's uwa does not produce as much distortion as Canon does...

and sigma's 50mm is very good...

[LIMABK]

Although its difficult to compare overall performance (Canon vs. 3P) the Sigma OS version is as at today selling for around $2,090 from AP.

Just posted the same query in another thread but if anyone has a view that the Sigma OS is between the canon IS MK I & MK II in terms of IQ and overall performance I would seriously consider the Sigma for non-professional use.

[LIMABK]

Hi All

Sorry to take up thread space but I subsequently found some reviews which may be helpful.

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/...00_2p8_os_c16/

http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/article...hsm_review.htm

After taking into account the conclusions I think that the Sigma is well worth considering on price / performance considerations. My feeling is that if you don't need the absolute best IQ (which most of us probably don't) then the Sigma is good for those of us with a limited budget. The AF functionality & OS seem to work well which is good enough for me. Negative points seem to be mainly on the design and lack of sharpness in the corner of images but then again some of this is overly pixel peeing.

[Gonzalez]

I have seen reviews that the 24-70mm EX has far more superior IQ than the L.

I am looking to get a Sigma 70-200 or a 80-400. How does the IQ of the 70-200 EX & 80-400 EX compared against 70-200 f2.8L IS and the 100-400mm L lens?

TS, if you need opinions, you need to be specific on what you are referring to? And you are comparing 24-70mm to which L? Please be more precise so that members can share their opinions.

So far in Sigma lens line up that can challenge L series are the following:

1. 50mm f1.4 HSM
2. 85mm f1.4 HSM
3. 24-70mm f2.8 HSM
4. 70-200mm f2.8 HSM

If you are looking for Sigma lens, I would advice you to consider the HSM family. HSM series have proven to be a real challenger towards L, in term of price, build and photo quality. The only setback is the front/back focusing issue, which put a lot of potential Sigma buyers in doubt. Go to any forum, you'll find the same feedback from Sigma users.

My 2 cents...

[ST1100]

There's more to just IQ when considering a Sigma over an original Canon. If there are body-lens matching issues, like front/rear focusing, AF quirks, etc, Canon will not entertain; Sigma might. Canon lenses are guaranteed forward-compatible with future bodies, while Sigma's might need a re-chip. Sigma's zooms turn the other way (not sure if the newer ones turn the same way) from Canon's, so if you use at least one zoom from either side the confusion drives you nuts.

The price difference between Canons and Sigmas used to be huge, with the Sigma stuff almost half price or less. With their current pricing, they actually have to be significantly superior to the original Canon's IQ to be even worth considering. But it does seem to be the new direction Sigma is taking, fighting on quality rather than price.

[tuwinkk]

i like sigma 70 200 because the color is not white..
ehheheh

sorry OOT

[Radiant]

i like sigma 70 200 because the color is not white..
ehheheh

sorry OOT

i know what u mean so that my wife dun find out i just spend a ton of money again

[akdwivedi]

I tend to agree that in UWA sigma gives better lenses. But I preferred to go with canon 24-70 L rather than sigma. My sigma lenses after gave me errors when I moved from film to crop dslr n then to 5dmk2. Even though sigma fixes it for free, it's still a pain to take the lenses to them. Even my worst canon lenses didn't havevthat problem.

Only sigma lens I carry now are 8mm fe, 14mm UWA and m looking for 120-300 f/2.8. The last one simply because it's unique n I cannon afford canon 300mm prime.

[Berkins]

The back or front focusing issue should be easily resolved using the micro adjustment feature in the newer eos models, correct me if I am mistaken.

[Akatsuki]

i know what u mean so that my wife dun find out i just spend a ton of money again

sneaky!!!

but i understand, always good to under-declare to maintain a harmonious relationship

in reference to the topic, i believe sigma 50 1.4 is a strong contender in this case.