It's built like a tank. Reminds me of my Zeiss glass. Focus ring is smooth with no play. Good solid metal case and feels great in your hand. Keep it up Sigma. The purple fringing test was way off. First image was focused on middle, top is purpleshifted and bottom is green. Second one is focused now to the top of the image and bottom is still green. You can't see the shifting to purple as the focus point is too up.
And the third image is at f2 so you will not notice the shifting as much because the other lenses were at f1. Kinda moot.
Jason, Thanks for the test, although I'm not sure I agree with you about the sharpness in the bridge shot. The second shot canon shows more camera shake than the first shot sigma so it's really not a fair comparison.
Take a look at the stars on either side of the bridge in the first and second crops -- to my eyes I see points of light for the sigma and little dashes of light for the canon. I'm assuming this is a slight camera movement but if you have another explanation please let us know.
And thanks again! I was about to comment on the same thing. I would think any well-informed amateur would see that and retake the picture, especially before using said picture in a comparison review. I opted out for the Rokinon 35mm T1. I thinks its beautiful bokeh and a sweet price point for video is an absolute no brainer for any videographer. Not sure what the author was smoking. I stopped reading the review after that No credibility at all.
I realize that this comment thread is probably dead but just thought I'd give my two cents. First off, I agree with many of the commenters here in that your tests were somewhat flawed in their presentation including the conclusions that were drawn. The bridge shot in particular was concluded as "no contest" and "way sharper" when the comparison images show very little difference, and if there is any it could be attributed to the fact that there was camera shake involved and the fact that the ISO looks higher on the sigma shot.
I am by no means advocating the Canon over the Sigma the Sigma is one of the sharpest lenses on the market , but when you combine the sharpness, cost, and weight, the Canon is a better buy for most users although you trade IS for 1. I was just about to say the same thing myself. I try to see any difference in resolution between the two bridge images, but can't find any. The only obvious difference is the brightness. And by comparing the Sigma against the Canon f2 on another site, I realise that the Canon is sharper in the corners than the Sigma, and about the same in the center.
I read several posts where people complained that the precise auto focus on Sigma lenses has been an issue even after they have had their lens micro adjusted and exchanged. Home Topics Reviews. The Verdict: When we look at performance, the Sigma and Canon L trade blows back and forth, but when you throw in price point you can't help but lean towards the Sigma.
Posted In:. Editorial Photography. Premium Photography Tutorials Check out the Fstoppers Store for in-depth tutorials from some of the best instructors in the business.
Log in or register to post comments. Tam Nguyen - March 8, If you were into playing "spot the difference", there's a bird in the third picture of the dusk.
Rather picturesque actually. Paul Monaghan - March 8, The second image you took with the sigma has a different focus point, this is why your seeing less purple fringing its still there.. It will be to do with how the lens is bending the light in front of and behind the focus point. John - March 8, " Renato A Go-go John - March 11, yes lightning he's right, don't make a fool of yourself pretending that you're a photographer! That said - I probably would rent and not buy this lens.
Glenn Marsh - March 8, Your approach was neither scientific or objective. Jens Marklund - March 8, Regarding the chromatic aberration: if you know anything about lenses, you know that most fast lenses gives a green CA on things in front of the focus point, and magenta behind it. Nico Socha - March 8, yeah the focus was not exactly the same, but hey the sigma has the edge i think.
David Neitz - March 9, I think the fact that the Sigma will soon have a USB dock to fine tune setting of the lens itself give it the clear advantage above anything Canon or Nikon can produce. Chuck Eggen - March 9, Canon fanboys are a bit upset. Josh R. Kevin Younger Josh R. Stack Overflow for Teams — Collaborate and share knowledge with a private group.
Create a free Team What is Teams? Learn more. Are Sigma lenses comparable to Canon lenses for a Canon camera? Ask Question. Asked 11 years, 4 months ago.
Active 6 years, 11 months ago. Viewed 8k times. Improve this question. Laura 2 2 gold badges 10 10 silver badges 25 25 bronze badges. Noel M Noel M 1, 3 3 gold badges 24 24 silver badges 29 29 bronze badges. Add a comment. Active Oldest Votes. We absolutely love them, for their respective strengths: Noone touches the Bigma for range.
Yes, it's soft. Yes, it's unbelievably big and heavy. But it's a disturbingly versatile lens. My mm is a great compromise lens; it's almost always attached to my camera, and I switch off when I have a particular need. Improve this answer. Regarding range, I would check out the Tamron mm. It is a pretty nice lens, and has a zoom range of 15x 5x more than the It doesn't get quite as tight on the zoom end, but it is amazingly wide on the short end.
Why does everyone use the zoom range as the x factor when comparing zooms. The mm couldn't touch the mm on reach.
I'm also very happy with my Sigma mm F2. Sharpness is very good. The only downside is the build quality, the zoomring is getting quite sloppy. Love the flickr link under "incredibly sharp".
The animal pics are really compelling, and I'm trying to figure out why. The newer "Bigma" lens is sharper than the old, and also has an OS that works slightly better.
I've had a lot of Sigma lenses in recent years and all have been pretty damn good. The EX is a great lens and about as wide as you can go on full frame. I currently have the , which is nice and sharp and has the advantage that it can take filters whereas the cannot. The Sigma's minimum focus distance is 1.
The Canon is not going to be considered a macro lens by any account, but it is better in a pinch. Paired with an extension tube the Canon can achieve. Overall, either lens is generally considered a great lens overall. The Canon provides weather sealing, an added stop of IS, better macro capabilities, more pleasing bokeh, a larger focusing ring, and a focus limiter switch.
This in my opinion is the biggest reason that the Canon is better fit for professional wedding photography. The Sigma is a great value, especially at its current price as compared to its price at introduction.
If wedding photography was taken out of the equation, I would almost fully endorse this lens, with the caution around the weather sealing. The fact is, that wedding photography requires in many cases the best equipment, to shoot in very demanding low light situations or wet environments with moving subjects , who will then require images to be printed on canvases and on display at home.
Short Answer - buy the high-end Canon lens. If you're actually working and making money shooting, then the amortization works out to be negligible difference in costs.
This isn't an opinion, it's a fact based on experience. A few decades ago - when zoom lenses were rare and prime lenses ruled I did some airplane to airplane photography. We surmised that the aperture on the aftermarket brand lens didn't close down fast enough at high speed use. I have shot with the Canon EFmm and the Sigma mm. As can readily be seen, the focus dropoff shooting that wide open is dramatic. If you like this style of shooting and I do , lenses with wide apertures are great. I know this is not one of the lenses under discussion, but the point I'm attempting to illustrate is that when you get into shooting shallow depth of field, you get onto shifting sands -- particularly when it comes to wedding shots.
If the wedding party expects sharp, shooting a fast lens won't usually deliver that from edge to edge when even moderately wide open. Finally, for those of you who have observed the purple around the eyelashes, it's not CA -- she had purple-tinted mascara on I never thought I'd have to learn what that was! I would recommend renting each one of the lenses you are considering for a wedding and see what works well for you. We are going to have a hard time telling you what to buy, it is your money, and only you know what is the best value and compromises for your photography.
They each have their own place, and it depends a lot on how much you want to push your ISO limits of your camera. Are you comfortable shooting all of the ceremony shots at ISO ? Are you comfortable setting up a tripod to get some of the ceremony shots? Those are the kind of trade offs you have to consider. You probably won't see too many professional wedding photographers with a Sigma zoom. In my experience, it just isn't worth the trade off for the focus speed.
I do not have any experience with this newer lens though. I have done extensive research, and thought long and hard about the same questions you are considering right now, but in the end, nothing is going to tell you better then actually shooting a few weddings with each lens in hand.
You may even find out that you would rather have a mm macro and or mm prime instead of even picking up a mm lens! I have wedding photographer friends who do that too! It is very reasonable to even rent this for 10 weekends if you are shooting a summer of weddings, before purchasing it. I can't answer your questions about IS or comparing Canon to Sigma; however, I wanted to add another choice to your list.
Even if there are not a lot of photographers on your local Craigslist, you maybe able to find the lens used in a camera store or on eBay. My advice is stick with Canon, whatever you do. My first lens was a Sigma, used on my Canon 40D and the quality was not good enough for professional use, even after a firmware upgrade.
I want to specialise in wedding and portrait photography. I wasted time and money going the more affordable route, so it cost me in the long run. I am now using my first Canon lens and have not looked back. Good luck! Also, worth considering is the second hand value of the lense. I would say that it is much easier to get good money for a Canon lens than for example a Sigma lens if you would find yourself trying to sell it. This is of course not the only factor to take into account but nevertheless it might be something to think of, at least for some people.
Sign up to join this community. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top. Stack Overflow for Teams — Collaborate and share knowledge with a private group. Create a free Team What is Teams? Learn more. Ask Question. Asked 9 years, 11 months ago. Active 9 years, 11 months ago. Viewed 7k times. Based on these available choices, I have a few related questions.
0コメント