Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 vs. Canon 24-70 f/2.8L

Discussion in 'Photography Equipment & Products' started by S2K1, Aug 28, 2007.

  1. S2K1

    S2K1 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    Messages:
    288
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Utah
    So I find myself needing a fast zoom lens. I shot at a friends wedding last week with a borrowed 24-105 f/4L and always found myself needing to be a stop lower. The cake cutting was shot at 1600 ISO(even with flash it was necessary :( ) and has some noise to it. They hired another photographer so it's alright, but I was still upset. Anyway, in a few weeks, I'll be shooting another friend's wedding. I have the 28-135 that I'd like to sell, and that would help me afford the Canon lens, but is it worth it to eek out another wedding with the 24-105 f/4L and save up for the Canon lens, or save $600 and get the Sigma now and worry about the Canon later?
     
  2. EOS_JD

    EOS_JD TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,698
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Shooting the cutting of a cake, set your 24-105 to manual f5.6 or even f8 (so you get what you need in focus) and shutter speed to 1/80th or so. Regards ISO (even in dark rooms) I set at around 400 and the flash should expose the scene correctly. Not sure why you needed ISO1600 with flash unless you were trying to capture a bit of the ambient light.

    I use the 24-105 together with a 70-200 f2.8L IS and a couple of fast prrimes. I'd say buy the 50mm f1.8 which will be great in low light situations.

    The Sigma lens is a pretty nice lens although it's a little soft at f2.8. the f4L is sharper at f4 than the Sigma is at f2.8 or f4.

    Shooting a wedding is a tough task and I'd agree that f4 is slow for a wedding lens but at the reception, I'll use flash to get the shots so aperture is not so much of a problem. I set camera to manual and ISO 400 and vary aperture and shutter speed to get the right exposure. The flash does a great job (580EX)
     
  3. Alex_B

    Alex_B No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    14,491
    Likes Received:
    206
    Location:
    Europe 67.51°N
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    The Sigma is not a bad lens, but shows some considerably CA and does of course not play in the same league as the Canon regarding sharpness wide open. But at least the CA can be repaired in the RAW converter.

    I used the Sigma happily for some years.
     
  4. Leo

    Leo TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    Messages:
    179
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I was at the same dilemna, I actuall bought the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 lens. I was very disappointed with it. Focusing is slow, soft on the 70mm end, zoom ring is very stiff, that sometimes it locks couldn't twist it till I play with the focusing to get it unlocked. It is heavy and clunky, after an hour of use I switched to my Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 lens. I returned it back and bought a Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L lens. It is night and day compared to the Sigma. Focusing is fast, pictures are sharp and clear. Do yourself a favor, get the Canon, you'll be happy.
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

24 70 canon vs24 70 sigma vs tamron

,
24-105 vs sigma 24-70
,
canon 24-105 vs sigma 24-70
,
canon 24-70 vs sigma 24-70
,
sigma 24 70 f2.8 vs canon 24 105
,
sigma 24-105mm san antonio tx
,
sigma 24-70 2.8 vs canon 24-105 f4
,
sigma 24-70 2.8 vs canon 24-70 2.8 l
,
sigma 24-70 vs canon 24-105
,
sigma 24-70/2.8l review