Any thoughts?: Canon Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

[bitteraspects]

theres a big difference between suggesting a cheap lense, and making a claim that its as good as one of the leading line of lenses. by no means am i saying that he shouldnt take a cheap third party lense into consideration for the sake of saving money, if that is a major issue. i simply find humor in your comparison.

 

[Big Mike]

I don't find that comparison humorous...I think it's a smart idea. Nobody said that the Sigma was better than the Canon...we all know it isn't.

You should compare it to the L lens and see what you think

Good idea.

many professional industry reviews have stated that the Sigma is nearly as good as the Canon L

I've heard good reviews too. It's obviously not as good as the Canon...but for 1/3 of the cost...the price/performance ratio is better than the Canon.

There is no reason to be a gear snob.

 

[bbaker35]

Thanks everyone for the advice. I am still sitting on the fence. The only real thing, and this might just be my enlarged ego speaking, but if I'm going to spend $1100 I would really like to have the red ring. If the truth be known the 17-70 2.8 IS may actually be the better lens to suit my needs at this time, but I just really wish I could feel totally confident with my purchase buying an L lens.

again, that just may be my ego speaking.

Thanks
Ben

 

[Digital Matt]

Sigma and Tamron make some great glass, not to be discounted. I will also say that if you are looking to improve your photoraphy, buying new equipment isn't the answer, nor is measurebating about it.

 

[rwebbart]

If your canon has a 1.6 crop factor (and I think it does) then the 17-55 is like a 27-88 (+/-).

 

[Orgnoi1]

+1 on the Canon 24-70... or even better yet find one of the 28-70L's out there... both are great lenses and the 28-70L wont rape you in price...

 

[Mad_Gnome]

If you're really set on buying the L glass, I'd say go for it. The L line is a fabulous series of lenses, and it's hard to go wrong. I just wanted to suggest an alternative if the price was a factor at all. Despite what some might think, the Sigma is not a cheap lens, although it's certainly less expensive than the Canon L. When I took the price/performance ratio into account, and after test driving both lenses, I bought the Sigma. When I bought my Minolta equipment, it was a no-brainer for me to buy it again.

Again, however, if you've got your heart set on L glass, I say buy it and have no regrets.

 

[Chris SWF]

Hi Ben,
I have a variety of lenses on both a 5d and a 1d and of all my lenses (L and otherwise) the 24-70 is my favourite. It is sheer quality both in the way it is made and in the image quality. I have even dropped it from waist height onto concrete while working and it is absolutely fine. (Change of trousers, that one!). The only caution I would say is that it is not a particularly useful focal length on a 20D however if you search for the best price on the internet then you will not lose if you decide to sell it and you will have a fantastic lens for when you move to full frame. Cheers Chris.

 

[Johno]

I've got the 24-70 and It's dynamite. If you are planning on upgrading to a 5d like you previously said, stick with the L glass, Some sigma's may be comparable on a cropped sensor, But on a full-frame the difference become extremely noticable. I was thinking of getting the sigma but I plan on purchasing a 5d soon, I went down, rented the sigma, the "L" and a 5d and compared them. You should do the same if you have the resources. Its a big purchase and you shouldn't always rely on the word of others, it sets you off in the right direction but ultimately you have to be the judge!