One year ago I would care about lab testing but my instinct actually wants real world comparisons for some reason. I understand technically there are better and worse lens but in reality there are bad, good, excellent and "magic" lens.
By that I mean the Sigma seems to be a good lens with a bit of magic
The canon also seems to be good and excellent when stopped down a bit. But I do not see that magic.
Jim Victory wrote:
The first two copies I tried were bad. The focus was all over the place. The first one was purchased when it was first released and the second one about a month ago. They both went back.
I just couldn't give up on this lens because I did see a glimmer of excellence in my first two copies. I just received my third copy and this one is everything I had hoped it would be. Sharp wide open and the focus is accurate up close and all the way to infinity.
I'm one happy camper now.
Jim
I had a similar experience, the first copy I got had severe front focus (I hardly believed it in fact, I had never seen that before!). My second copy is just perfect, really sharp wide open, with a bokeh that reminds me of my 135L
