Would like to get input from anyone who has had the opportunity to use or compare both lenses. Just wondering about the Sigma. I've read some very positive comments and reports on this lens. I know the lens is not weather sealed or parfocal (at least from what I have read). So any comments on the Sigma would be much appreciated.
Bryan Carnathan does a really good job with his reviews, and has a sectin at the bottom comparing the siggy to the canon. You can also click on the "image quality" link to open a page that lets you compare test shots of the 2 at various focal lengths and apertures: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-24-105mm-f-4.0-DG-OS-HSM-Art-Lens.aspx
Allan Bruce wrote:
From that link it looks like the Sigma is better, wide open at 24mm but worse from 50mm and above
Perhaps. But if you go over to www.photozone.de and compare them, the Sigma is sharper than the Canon in every focal length. The borders are about the same, but the center resolution is much better. A quote from the Sigma summary, "The question of the day is, of course, how the Sigma lens can be seen vs the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 USM L IS. Honestly, they are very close and depending on your preferences, the edge may be on the one or the other side."
Thanks for your replies. I own the Canon lens but had read several reviews about the sharpness of the Sigma and was considering it. I may wait until I can read more comments from users who have purchased the Sigma.
subgenius wrote:
Thanks for your replies. I own the Canon lens but had read several reviews about the sharpness of the Sigma and was considering it. I may wait until I can read more comments from users who have purchased the Sigma.
You might check in the Nikon forum; the lens seems to garner universal praise over there.
In the Canon mount, the real comparison is between the 24-70/4L IS and the Sigma, where the tradeoff lies largely in terms of size, weight, and that extra 35mm of reach. Both lenses are sharper than the 24-105L in practice, have faster AF, and better stabilization.
johnctharp wrote:
You might check in the Nikon forum; the lens seems to garner universal praise over there.
You can not compare lenses across camera platforms. Nikon users have wanted a lens like the Canon 24-105mm L instead of the awful 24-120. Its no wonder they would be happy with it.
The lenses are close enough in optical performance that I'm not sure that should be the deciding factor here. For me, both price and future compatibility both favor the Canon. For those reasons alone, I'd have to choose the L.
