Canon 24-70 f/2.8L vs Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 HSM? Value for money?

[Necroist]

Hi guys,

I'm looking to expand my gear a little bit and I'm kinda torn between the two 24-70 lenses.

Canon's 24-70 f/2.8L
and
Sigma's 24-70 f/2.8 HSM

I've rented the 24-70L for a whole week before and I really love the quality of the lens (image and built-wise) but the price is a little too steep, especially when compared to the cheaper Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 HSM.

I've been reading some mixed reviews that says that Sigma's image quality is comparable if not, better than the L's and others that say the L is much better.

Which would you guys recommend?

 

[tecnica]

Out of so many 24-70 from various manufacturers including nikon, canon's version actually does not score very high in IQ.

But it makes up for it in the superb(tank-like) build quality.

To me, I look at the whole package of the lens when deciding which to buy.

So yeah.

 

[Necroist]

So you would think that the Canon version is a much better option even though its almost twice as expensive?

 

[rhema83]

So you would think that the Canon version is a much better option even though its almost twice as expensive?

I think what tecnica meant is that although the Canon 24-70L is not extremely outstanding optically (unlike 70-200 f/2.8L IS II or 135 f/2L), it is built very tough mechanically and is a real workhorse lens. (In fact, I also cannot think of another lens more deserving the "workhorse" title!) Considering both optical and mechanical quality, the Canon L lens is very competitive even though it costs twice as much.

 

[edutilos-]

So you would think that the Canon version is a much better option even though its almost twice as expensive?

Everyone places different value on things.

If you assume the two's optical quality to be on par, then the question that remains is whether it is worth it to pay the additional money for the better build quality. That really depends on your situation - such as, how much punishment do you really need your lens to take, how often do you use it thus requiring more resistance to wear and tear, etc? This is unique, and only you can decide for yourself. Frankly, canvassing opinions isn't going to do much for the quality of your decision, as in the end, another person's opinion might be founded on grounds that do not apply to you!

I always found it interesting why no one does polls on whether they should marry someone else, but they seem to do it relentlessly for gear. Perhaps it seems more acceptable to talk about non-human objects that way.

 

[rhema83]

I always found it interesting why no one does polls on whether they should marry someone else, but they seem to do it relentlessly for gear. Perhaps it seems more acceptable to talk about non-human objects that way.

If you look closely enough, I think many people are not genuinely seeking advice but simply trying to reaffirm their choice. It is nigh impossible to convince them as they will simply brush any negative feedback aside.

Sorry for being OT...

 

[Necroist]

Hi all,

It seems like we may have gotten a little off course. I was just trying to ask if anyone has experience using both and whether they feel either one or the other is better and maybe why.

I read reviews saying that Sigma's 24-70 can be quite soft, is this true?

 

[SilverPine]

Hi all,

It seems like we may have gotten a little off course. I was just trying to ask if anyone has experience using both and whether they feel either one or the other is better and maybe why.

I read reviews saying that Sigma's 24-70 can be quite soft, is this true?

I do not have the above mention lens, but I do have the older version of both : Canon EF 28-80 f/2.8 L and Sigma 28-70 f/2.8. For Sigma, at the 70mm end the image is soft, for Canon the image is sharp from 28 to 80mm (when wide open) and it is rich in color.

The 24-70mm lens is more for full frame camera usage, base on my personal usage style, 99% of the time I use Canon EF 20-35mm f/2.8 L and EF 70-200mm f/4 L. My personal view, 24mm not wide enough for landscape and 70mm too short for the closeup.


.

 

[ahboy168]

Ok, I own both.
Frankly, if u are not a pro, just get the sigma will do. It is just as good.
Cheaper, lighter, compact.
Sigma @70mm is a bit soft but ok.
Hsm is as fast as usm.
Canon seems to have slightly better/brighter color contrast to me.

 

[BraveHart]

If you're asking about value for money I would say none of the L Lens are value for money if all you do is take pics to display online or print no bigger than 4R.

Most Sigma EX lens are value for money in my books (price vs quality).

 

[Turbonetics]

hi,from your topic u mentioned that u like the quality(image and build) of the canon lens.
and u heard that sigma ones are comparable.
if i were u,i will buy the canon one because:-
1).it's canon lens that u had tried convinced u(if u were to based on replies here and eventually got the sigma and find that it doesn't perform as good as canon ones,u will probably regret).
2).u had not tried the sigma ones but just based on hear say(one man's meat is another's poison).
so i suggest u try sigma one first before deciding.

anyway,i used to own the canon 24-70mm on a 1.6x crop body.
it is indeed a very solid lens and image were very sharp and very nice colour too.
i sold it off reluctantly due to funding of my new set-up.

if there were to be an improvised version,most like i will get it again.

 

[Kiwira]

owned both, and i'm siding with sigma's here

it's sharper and the bokeh is more pleasing than the L's, it loses in build-wise but how often are you going to abuse it :>

 

[oracle0711]

Ok, here is my take and this is purely a personal preference. TS, you would be the ultimate judge for yourself eventually.

I owned a couple of copies of the Canon EF 24-70mm L USM over the years due to the need to have backup system when I was working full time on assignment. All copies maintained high standards of work delivery satisfaction. It's built, image quality, focusing speed and as well as the ability to withstand harsh condition especially when working overseas. I have seen Nikon's version and likewise, it is another superior piece of hardware.

I gave up Sigma years back for 2 reasons - optics quality and built. Though I have seen great improvements in certain prime lenses (and they have changed their pricing strategy to create premium quality brand image), I still feel that there is great inconsistency in their production quality. Personally, the optics tend to produce a warmer tone for the Canon bodies that I am used to. It could purely a perception but I cannot afford to try and compensate the final artwork all the time - just too much work when there are tonnes of images to post processed.

To me, the difference in price is worth paying. You can be sure that the Canon L lens has a higher resale value too.

Cheers,

Daniel

 

[IsenGrim]

Its a nice lens to have. But from experience, I don't think you need the 2.8 unless you have alot of indoor event work.
How about 24-105f4 + 35f2 + 85f1.8?

I think this will give you much more fun than 1 24-70.

 

[ahboy168]

Test before u buy. Hear that Sigma calibration is expensive $250?? Canon only $60.
Is weight important to you ? Canon is heavvvvvy

 

[beachbum]

i have owned and worked extensively with both lenses (different copies as well) on 1dsmk3 and 5dmk2s.
like many mentioned, the canon is built like a tank and is a real work horse - it will never give you any problems mechanically.
But two copies of the sigma has given me zoom collar jammed issues before. Sigma build quality even for their EX series is still not up to par with canon L. Not to mentioned that the sigmas are not weather sealed like the Ls.
But having said that the sigma is optically head and shoulders above the canon at f2.8 (isn't that why you buy a f2.8 lens?) in all focal lengths. It is just tack sharp!!
In the end, i chose the sigma because of its optics cause I don't ever need to shoot in the rain nor subject my gear to constant abuse.
But one word of advice. Buy it new with local warranty because you never know what can be wrong with it....

 

[huatman]

Just got the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, didn't get the canon 24-70 due to the price n the size. There some front focus problem at 70mm end, do some adjust using the camera AF micro-adjustment n it fine. Like the IQ of the lens. The only thing that make me considered for quite sometime when in the shop is the lack of weather sealing and no IS/OS compare to canon 24-105L

 

[Necroist]

Thanks all.

Btw, I've just bought the 24-70 f/2.8L from a nice gentlemen over at B/S

No regrets!

 

[Turbonetics]

Thanks all.

Btw, I've just bought the 24-70 f/2.8L from a nice gentlemen over at B/S

No regrets!

congrats on your purchase of a very good lens.
enjoy and get used to the weight and everything will be fine..

 

[Valkarian]

damn. i really want to add this to my arsenal. REALLY. T.T