Lens Test & Review: Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 ART vs Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L II
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 08. 2024
- FULL REVIEW (with RAW files): www.lightandma...
My Patreon Page: / matthewgore
A comparison and review of the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 OS ART and the Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II, which does not have image stabilization. In which I look at the sharpness and resolution, the autofocus, stabilization, vignetting, and general handling of the two lenses.
#SigmaART #Canon #LensReview
MUSIC CREDITS
Automaton by Robotaki, 8889 by Eminence, Messiah by Laszlo, and Clova by Pylot all come from the MONSTERCAT catalog. Licensed here: www.monstercat...
Nice and Easy by Jason Shaw is Creative Commons:
freemusicarchiv...
Autumn Sunset by Jason Shaw is Creative Commons:
freemusicarchiv...
Landra's Dream by Jason Shaw is Creative Commons:
freemusicarchiv...
Respect the work you've done with review, so professional
Thanks!
This is by far the best comparison of these two lenses that I have been able to find. Excellent Work!
Thanks Marshall, glad you found it useful!
Great, comprehensive review! I've been so happy with my Sigma 35mm prime, which outperforms pretty much any other lens there in this range. I was going to go for the 24-70 Sigma as well, seeing how happy I was with the prime. Really glad I checked out this review before I did. Thanks for putting in the work, I will subscribe for more content like this!
Thanks :-) Of course, the difference in resolution between the two lenses is noticeable at 100%, but for the most part, they're both nice and sharp lenses for real world use. The autofocus on the Sigma, on the other hand, was just not up to the challenge this time, though I've had very good performance with other Sigma ART lenses.
I've been watching several review videos as I'm trying to figure out what camera and lenses to buy next. You're video is so transparent with side-by-side comparison, it really helps with my decision making! Thanks for the great video, subscribing to view more of them! :)
Im glad I got to watch this. I have now decided on the canon.......kit lens , cause I dont have the money to buy any one of these 😅
lol
😂
You can buy it second hand!🙏🏽
🤣🤣🤣🤣 Part of the reason my decision has been so long to make.
Thank you for taking the time to make this video! Excellent!
17:56 that ankle...
No doubt that the Canon 24-70/2.8LII is the best in it's class, no other brand comes close including SIGMA Art or Nikon, regarding the Canon 24-70/2.8L vs. the 24-70/2.8LII, well nevertheless the original 24-70/2.8L Canon is a remarkable lens, ( I owned it for years ) sharp specially at 35mm, contrast is nice and a true workhorse, now Canon will stop giving service to this lens by the end of 2019 or early 2020, if that is not a concern to you and you do not want to be spending money because you already know is a great lens keep it, again just remember that nothing is like the Canon 24-70 2.8LII.
Matthew as usual your reviews are right on point
Julio Sanchez the Sony is better
Great to have you back with these new comparisons, Matthew!
Matthew, I've just discovered this video by accident. Very nicely done.
Thanks :-)
This is a great, unbiased, and detail oriented review. 5 stars
Very precise and detailed. Appreciate it. I own a sigma 24-70 which is a little heavy but still produces good photos.
Thanks! The Sigma is a solid lens optically, for sure. I had some AF issues with it, but firmware updates (and newer cameras) may have fixed that by now.
Very informative. One of the best lens reviews I've come across. Subscribed!!!
Thanks :-)
point noted, but can we all agree that the image at 20:49 is just an absolute masterpiece? Amazing shot Matthew!
Thanks BT! It's always nice to hear when someone actually likes the photos in these things 🙂
@@MatthewGore all good man, thanks for sharing your knowledge with us
Late update: I ended up buying a Tamron 24-70 G2 for my R6, and I don't regret it by one single bit!
Hands down, the best image stabilization (and lens colors) I tried to date!
@@bahaatamer1245 Thanks for the update, and I'm glad to hear that it worked out! Enjoy :-)
I like the comparison. I am looking at getting one of these for my 90D. If only the Canon would have image stabilization, but it doesn't. Canon is always behind the curve. I wish the Sigma would focus better in sports.
Thanks so much for these comparison. There are several image quality comparisons on the web but what's extremely important to me are real-life performances of the IS and, even most important, auto-focus performance. Since I earn a significantopart of my monthly income by shooting at events like partys and festivals I can't have either IS or AF screw-ups - any lens I buy has to be at least reliable enough so I don't have to worry about every single shot. Thanks for pretty much being the only guy who put this to a real-life test outside controlled "lab" conditions!
WOW !!! Superb comparison test !
Thanks!
That was an awesome review. For cinema shooting I can see people harnessing the Sigma's "flaws" for aesthetic effect.
Still missing the shots with the IS on instead of off in the Review. Is there improvement in sharpness also if it's on a tripod with the sigma.
I agree with your dim view of the Sigma version. I've been shooting Sigma Primes for a few years now (I have the 20, 35, 50, 85 and am about to buy the 105), and love them, but I was majorly disappointed after buying the Sigma 24-70 Art a few months ago. It's soft and seems to miss focus a lot more than any of my other lenses. I also have the 14-24 Sigma Art, and it's super sharp compared to the 24-70, and I used to own the first version of the Canon 24-70 a few years ago, and it too was superior. I've re-calibrated the Sigma 24-70 and updated firmware with the Sigma dock, but it still sux in my opinion. I prefer Sigma over Canon for lenses cos I shoot with both the 5D Mark IV and the Sony A7R3 so like the versatility. I will however be trading in my 24-70 as soon as I get time to suss out a replacement for my events work. I did like the focal range cos it means not having to switch lenses between social pix and shows, so am watching reviews to see what options I have out there. I just wish someone would come up with a 20-105 f2.8 lol. I don't care how big it is or how much it costs as long as it's sharp f2.8 to f8 lol. SIGMA ARE YOU LISTENING?? lol
Thanks for the review, good to have my own thoughts verified.
So in my experience, Sigma Primes are the ones that can hang with canon, but their zooms still need work. But, have the Sigma 18-35 paired with my C100 and it's my most favorite lens ever. Pretty amazing piece of glass.
I have a mix, and have tested more. From my tests on a Canon 5dsr, The super sharp lenses are the Sigma 14, 24, 50, and 14-24. the 14 and 50 are epic. I shot samples and they outperformed Canon. The disappointingly less sharp ones are the 20, and 24-104. My Canon 35 II, 85, and 135 are super sharp. I was disappointed enough in my Canon 14, and 24 to replace them with Sigma, especially the 24! Also, a couple times I tested lenses that were not sharp, but the next copy of the same lens was a lot sharper. Always test your lens before buying!
Very useful review. Thank you. I will check out more of your videos
I appreciate the video even more watching it the third time. You pointed out very good points all throughout.
the best comparison i've ever seen thank you sooo much for accuracy!
Thanks for the comparison! I was struggling with the good and bad now I have a clear view of both.
Nice new intro music! Great video!
Thanks! I've used this music in one other video, so far, but I don't usually keep it the same from video to video. This track is "Automaton" by Robotaki, on Monstercat.
Thanks! Very helpful and really help making a decision! The Canon seems good enough to replace some prime lenses.
The Canon is really nice and sharp. It's not as sharp as the sharpest primes, but it will certainly be close enough for most people, and will be as sharp as many older primes.
Great review, so clear decision, finally. I am sure you'd like to know you are one of the best here. Wish you could compare Canon zoom to primes(either Art or Canon L). I am not taking about just the 'f' which is obvious I for most of us but just how well they catch up when f matches with regards to sharpness and other attributes. Much appreciated.
Disappointing if this is typical. I use a 5D4 and really need something fast and accurate for weddings. I find it TOTALLY STUPID Canon has IS on the 24-70 f./4 lens and not on the f/2.8 version. This is plan stupid. I have actually considered selling Canon gear and going to Nikon as they do offer an IS version on their 24-70mm f/2.8...Wake up Canon!...........Nice video however...
What a great comparison video! thank you
That's a no-brainer in favour of the Canon even with the $300 price premium.
The sigma is way too soft, almost like it's out of focus even.
Yes, I thought so too. That was one of the first things I checked as I was putting this together. In each test, I shot multiple frames at each aperture, and refocused between each, which is my standard procedure, and then I check to make sure the one I've chosen to show is the best (since a gust of wind or passing truck or mistake on my part can always be a possibility). But in this case, all of the shots that I chose were the same as the others.
Is it a back focus issue on the sigma or no?
@@MisterWealth Nope. But that's one of the reasons I shoot live view for these... No back or front focus problems that way.
Couldn't agree more! I was so confused by the out of focus shots (even sometimes with stationary subjects) that I did a bit of research and installed a Lightroom Plugin to show focus points. THe little focus square showed up in the right place, but the shot for some reason it would occasionally focus behind the subject (sometimes 1/10 out of focus shots, sometimes more). This was even more frequent when I was focusing on the edge of someones head in low light (better contrast point for nailing focus). And there seems to be no rhyme or reason as to when it happens. I also started shooting a lot more using the LCD screen rather than the viewfinder, cos I've heard focus is more accurate that way. Still sux tho. So sad, as I had high hopes for this lens :(
How is the 24-70 art vs the RF 24-70? I’m looking for one but don’t have the 2399.00. I was looking at the 24-105 RF but want the F2.8. I am shooting with the EOSR. I am using a Sigma 150-600 and it works great adapted. Watching the whole video, seems actually the 24-105 is better? Maybe 2.8 is not needed. I have great ISO capability with the R. What do you think? I’m not a full time photographer. I am going to invest in the R5 body tho later on.
Unfortunately, I'm not into the Canon R system yet; I've only used the R cameras and lenses casually and for some portrait shoots, not to do any serious testing. For this lens, though, the Sigma would not be my first choice; if you're going 3rd party, I prefer the Tamron G2. That said, my advice is to always buy the least expensive camera that will meet your needs and buy the best lenses you can afford; that's going to make a bigger difference in your work. I'd also go for an f/2.8
Good luck!
Matthew Gore ok, I appreciate that. I have 3 other RF lens’. I just didn’t have a standard telephoto.
Matthew, you ZOOM IN to the longer focal length, not zoom out. Zoom out means a minimum focal length in the available "zoom range," which is nominally 24 mm in this case. I wrote nominally, because most lenses have rounded up claimed focal length values from their actual values.
Yes, this is true. I misspoke as I was recording, and decided not to re-record, assuming that people would probably figure out what I meant :-)
Thorough review as usual.
I saw that Sigma offers calibration. Did you end up getting the Sigma calibrated? If so did that make improvement or change your opinion. Thank you in advance!
I actually used to use a program called Reikan FoCal to automatically calibrate my camera and lenses that needed it, but the Sigma tested here did not need any. One of the nice things about moving to mirrorless cameras now is that I never have to worry about calibration again :-)
@@MatthewGore good point. I’m still holding out transitioning over to mirrorless. Thanks for reminding me about that software. I bought it and didn’t get around to using it.
@Matthew Gore - I do motorsports photography and use the 24-70 F4 with stabilization. I'm wondering if upgrading to the Canon 2.8 without stabilization will have an impact on panning very fast moving subjects? The F4 version has been amazing in this regard, but I want something with a lower aperture for still shots
Hi Alex, that's a good question. I shot with the 24-70 f/4 for about a year before I switched to Sony, and I loved the lens, but when I was shooting sports, I always turned the IS off because there isn't a "panning mode" switch on the IS, and I found that tracking could be a little jerky at times. So, if you're panning at low shutter speeds for motorsports, I'd be surprised if you're getting much benefit from the IS on the f/4, especially if you've been doing it for a while and can usually pan with smooth motion. So, the Canon f/2.8 should be fine for you. That said, you might consider the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC G2 (I have a video about it, too). It has image stabilization and f/2.8 and good AF, though it's not quite as sharp as the f/2.8L.
well done, a lot of effort in this video.
Great vid, like your style of review...hope you can make more videos and more power to your endeavors.
Thank you! Even if you're not a Sony shooter, you might find my latest review (of the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8) for Sony interesting.
@@MatthewGore thanks 👍📸
Man, I'm glad I did my due diligence. Thank you!!! Canon for my BMPCC 6k
Elvis Presley how is it
I’m looking for the the 24-70 for bmpcc 6K as well, Canon is sharper but the Sigma has optical stabilization which can come useful on the pocket 6k, how do you find the Canon one on the camera?
Thank you so much! I shoot on the Canon 5d Mark IV very often in poorly lit churches. Trying to capture great shots in low light using Canon lenses is always my issue. I never shoot off the tripod in church. I have rented the Canon 24-70 twice but for my latest shoot, they only had the Tameron 24-70 2.8 this time. At first, I was a little nervous but now I'm really excited about the image stabilization. I'll be shooting in a church again this Sunday and can't wait to see what I get using this lens. If they're good, I'll take the plunge and buy the Tameron 24-70. I currently shoot on the Canon 70-200 and 35 mm which is a gorgeous prime lens. It never fails. However, I really need something in between the two. Thank you so much Matthew! This video as well as your comparison of the Tameron vs. Canon has been so helpful. God bless you.
Hi Patrice, glad you found it useful! Tamron makes some excellent lenses, but the image stabilization is really the huge thing with this one. The Canon 24-70 f/4 IS is also great, but since you lose a full stop of light, it's not ideal for dark interiors. It is nice and lightweight, though.
Consider the Sigma Art 50mm f1.4 for dark church wedding shots. For me it’s the only Sigma lens that beats the canon 50 f1.2 hands down for sharpness and quality.
So I know this video is 5 years old, but I do have a question you may have the answer to by now... does the canon beat the sigma at low shutter speeds when used with a camera with in body image stabilization? I've got legacy canon DSLRs and want to add an R body and I've got options that come with either sigma or the canon.
Great, just the review that’s needed!
how about Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L vs Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L II?
The best comparison video. Thank you so much
Great review. Thank you very much !
Glad you liked it :-)
-- Thank you. Objectivity combined with categorical usage was presented concisely and clearly. Thank you, Mathew.
Very good work Matthew
This has got to be one of the best lens comparisons I’ve ever seen. Hoping you compared the Tamron G2?
Thanks! I compared the Canon to the G2 (and the Tamron G1) czcams.com/video/bnXe0s_U9k4/video.html but I didn't push ahead and do the Tamron vs Sigma, because it didn't seem necessary after the others were already up :-)
This is a great review. Well done sir👍
You are testing focusing to almost inf for sharpness compare. if focus to portrait distance, things may change.
Es hat sich ja recht schnell gezeigt, dass die Sigma Linse nicht so gute Leistung hat, wie Canon. Was ich hier aber merkwürdig finde, dass man den Film so weit mit Beispielen, die sich wiederholen, ausgedehnt hat. Es könnte ein Indiz dafür sein, dass man Canon bewerben möchte und Sigma ausstechen.
Thanks for sharing this good comparison!
Great video! The price difference between the US and UK is HUGE!! The same lens costs the equivalent of $2,419 to buy in the UK.
I love your videos, they’re really helpful and informative. Are you planning on doing a comparison between Sigma’s and Canon’s 70-200mm f/2.8?
Thanks! Yes, it's in the works.
Thank you so much for helping show various shots including basketball.
Glad they were helpful :-)
Do you have a review of the sigma for sony?
Yes, right here :-) czcams.com/video/_ARBI0osR34/video.html
Hi friend, great review. Thanks.
Help me please.
I was using the Sigma Art 24-70 DG HSM but someone dropped it and it broke. I'm going to buy another one and now I have the possibility to buy the Canon 24-70 II USM. I use 90% of the time on the Canon R6 which already has a stabilizer on the sensor.
Today, would you choose Canon or Sigma Art?
Thanks
i am confused .. which lens should i buy 24-70 or 7-200 for my street photography , portraits and events ?
Thank you for doing all this! I love my Sigma lenses but when I get this particular lens configuration I want all the quality I can get and it looks like Canon is going to be the one for me.
Even when the lenses were similar in sharpness stopped down, the canon always gave better colors.
Yeah I noticed that too. The colors just had more Vibrance to them. It's just something about the Canon that draws you to it over the Sigma. I really wanted to buy the sigma art 24-70 in the sigma art 72-200 to save quite a bit of money.
i feel like the sigma is not for landscape photos. its more for street and portraits. the canon though seems its best in all categories you tested in
my god this is by far one of the best comparison between lenses and it helped me a lot to decide my investment.. thank you!
Having such a hard time deciding which 24-70 I want to go with. IS is a pretty big deal to me as my hands are the most stable around, but that canon definitely took the edge with quality overall...
I'm a big fan of the Tamron 24-70 G2 for Canon. If you haven't seen my video on that one yet, you might want to check it out.
great test.
Thanks :-)
From what I am seeing here, no question the Canon has the better glass - produces noticeably sharper pictures. Considering the minimal difference in price why would anyone even consider the Sigma?
Image stabilization is the only thing that comes to mind, but I'd go for the Tamron instead :-)
Very informative!
should i buy the canon len 24-70
both have chromatics aberrations, i want to look at distortion as well, lines are far away to apreciate the distortion in this shot, the sensor with banding as a big issue to me, this can´t be corrected
Excellent video!
That fucking canon is a beast😭😭😭
Thanks so much for this video, it is very helpful, I really appreciate it! :-)
Glad you found it useful!
Thanks for your effort doing these reviews.
Can I ask you if you are planning or if you have done any kind of comparisons between this amazing canon and, for example: the sigma 50mm at 2.8 and 4. Also between this canon an the sigma and or Tamron at 35mm at 2.8 and 4?
Ahh, that might be an interesting comparison. It's unfortunately not one that I will probably be able to pull off. From what I've seen, the Sigma ART is going to be sharper at f/2.8, and f/4, at 50mm, though it won't be dramatic at f/4, and of course, both lenses are so sharp that the difference will mostly be academic. There will also be differences in distortion and contrast.
@@MatthewGore don't know if you understood but I was referring to the prime 50mm f1.4 sigma. Your answer was based on that right?
@@pyroBlastM Right, I was talking about the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART :-)
Great video
Great review!
Thanks!
@@MatthewGore i just had really big issue with choosing between these two. Thanks to this review I've finally made my decision and I'm going for canon. Thanks:)
Great! I should say, though, that the Tamron G2 also deserves serious consideration. I personally find that the image stabilization is more frequently helpful than the modest differences in resolution. But, if you've seen that video, there are also some (relatively minor) autofocus issues to consider for sports.
This is very nice test. Thank you for it. Canon is the clear winner here even with the higher price tag.
@Matthew Gore, Great vid, Nice labeling; How do you label the parts of the lenses.
I create the whole video in Photoshop, including the animation. The labeling is just done with the text tool and line tool.
@@MatthewGore Thank u
Thanks for the informative video. I have a question here, does sigma 24-70 f2.3 works with crop sensor dslr like canon 80d , 77d ?
Hello Sudip, The 24-70 lenses work with crop sensor (APS-C) cameras like the 80D, but since the sensor is smaller, the angle of view that you get will be narrower.... more like a 35-112mm lens. For APS-C cameras, I prefer 17-55 f/2.8 (or 17-50 by Sigma), but that's a personal choice. Good luck!
Matthew, somewhat off topic, what is the best time of the year (month) to visit Seattle? Thank you in advance!
The Seattle area is pretty wonderful year round, depending on your interests. As a general rule, August and (mostly) September have the most reliably warm and sunny weather. October through June is usually overcast and drizzly. July can go either way. If you want to spend time in the mountains, August and September are great for hiking when we've had a heavy snow year (in the mountains... there's never a heavy snow year in the city). In years with less snow, the average person can hike pretty safely for most of the spring, summer and fall. If you like to ski or snowboard, January-February is most reliable, but occasionally the areas will open as early as November. If you're happy with mild temperatures and occasional showers, pretty much any time between March and October is good. That said, the past couple of summers have been very warm and dry, from June through August. I don't know if this is an indicator of things to come, or just an anomaly. I guess we'll see.
Matthew, thank you again. RE: "October through June is usually overcast and drizzly." Wow! Where I live (S-E Virginia), summer is miserable (hot and humid), September is very nice, late fall to early spring is mild compared to a lot of other states. San Diego is still my "dream climate" location. I've learned one thing recently: check forest fires before vising Seattle...
Do you think the increased resolution of the 5ds R is a reason why cannon crushed sigma is this test?
I tend to avoid sigma anyways because of resale value but I would think the sigma would preform much better on a 5d or crop variant.
Great review as always.
I wondered that a little myself along the way, but I don't think so. You may have seen the previous video of the Tamron G2 and the Canon, also on the 5DS R, and the resolution was much closer. But in the past, when testing on the 5D III, I've generally been able to see that one lens was much sharper than the other (in the ART lens tests, anyway), and the higher resolution of the 5DS R sensor would only make a difference in cases where the images looked identical at a lower resolution.
I've found that the ART series lenses have excellent resale value, for what it's worth. Also, talking about crop sensors, all of the current Canon APS-C models have 20 or 24 megapixel sensors, which have higher pixel density than the 5DS R (which is about the same pixels per inch as a 20 megapixel APS-C). So, shooting with a crop sensor, you would get the advantage of using the sharpest part of the image circle, but you'd also be looking at it with higher resolution... so image quality problems in the center and a little away from the center will be more visible on APS-C 24 megapixel cameras. Ugh :-(
Great review. Shouldn't the subject used for the first part of the test been flat surfaces like building wall (like the ones you used about 14:xx time)? This lenses seems to have different DoF. Anyway you helped me decide which lens to buy. Thanks
I typically use a cityscape instead of a flat surface because at that distance, the lens is at its "infinity" focus setting, and there's no significant depth of field concerns or field curvature. I'll sometimes go with a shorter distance to test whether there IS field curvature, though.
Great job on sharing the details of your compassion. However, anyone who is serious about Sigma lenses, know that there is quite a bit of adjustments that can be made to your Sigma lens. To do this, a Sigma USB DOCK UD-01 is necessary. Sigma lenses require a bit more work to set up for each users preferences and gear, such as camera bodies and such. And yes, they can be customized to some extent and dialed in to your liking utilizing the USB dock plugged into your computer. When you say "infinity focus was used and the Sigma wasn't as sharp (at times/in varying locations within images)" that is already knowledge that Sigma users are privy to. My first Sigma zoom was the APSC, 18-35 f1.8 Art for Canon EF mount. I had heard nothing but "this lens is amazing and everyone needs this" but when I first used it, the infinity focus just wasn't working out. It drove me absolutely nuts. However, after a bit of research, I realized that the lens could be calibrated and that was something many users have done. So that would be my question to you? Did you make certain that the lens was properly calibrated before doing a side to side comparison? And yes, while I understand the thought process of 'when I spend $1000 or more on a lens, it should just work...I shouldn't need to tweak anything...' that is very similar to saying 'well I shouldn't have to set up custom settings or function buttons on my camera bodies or lenses...They should just work.' Please hear me say I know you did or said nothing of the short, and I'm not suggesting you did. But as all of our cameras and lenses are tools, it's important to make certain all information is presented to viewers as fairly as possible. Again, I'm in no way suggesting manipulation or communicating bias was ever intended. I just feel like those who prefer Sigmas and use them rather than Canon glass, do get a fair shake. As an influencer Matthew, obviously your opinion matters! That's why we're all here to learn and continue evolving as artists. Thanks for your work and I encourage you to keep it up! Fantastic content! Thank you for your time.
So, Sigma is heavier, still expensive and less sharp than Canon. I guess chasing Optical Stabilization has no point. Thanks for that review. I Have 24-70 f/4 - pretty sharp lens with IS.
Matthew, thank you for this review. I'm really looking to get one of these for my Canon 77D. Its crop so, um guessing it be 35-85mm on the view range. But I've read that I lose the 2.8 bokeh it to move to 3.2 on a crop sensor. It's fine with me. But about the image stabilization is it bad shooting only events hand held. Thanks for reading. If anyone has suggestions or help please feel free 😊
Hi Aerin. On a Canon 77D, the zoom range is basically 38-105mm. You'll get the sharpest part of the lens, since they're softest around the edges and that will be cropped off. As far as bokeh goes... the same subject from the same distance will have the same bokeh, but yes... if you move back from your subject so that the framing looks the same as it would on a full-frame sensor, you'll be farther away, so the depth of field will not be as shallow.
The image stabilization on the Sigma or Tamron G2 will always be a big help when shooting events, and especially if you're shooting with an APS-C camera instead of full-frame.
I personally don't like to use a 24-70 on APS-C. Instead, I'd go for one of the 17-50 or 17-55 f/2.8 lenses that will provide an equivalent field of view. Sigma, Tamron and Canon all make models, and they're all good... the Sigma in particular. Also consider the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 ART, which will give you better bokeh and low-light shooting (NO stabilization, though), if you can live with the shorter zoom range... they also make a 50-100 f/1.8.
@@MatthewGore I looked into that too. I currently own the 18-55mm kit lens and the 50mm 1.8 . As you know they both run on my 77D so it's never as the actual focus length. I love my 50mm cause I get the 80mm look but a 50mm dept of field.
At event I don't mind using my kit lens cause I can zoom in and out, but it's very bad in low light . I gotta keep switching to my 50mm for close or single subjects . It's not for group for sure unless I wanna be standing 25ft away lol. So I'll definitely look into the 17-50mm. thank you very much for your advice Matthew.
Thank you!
My pleasure :-)
Do you have (or can you do) a video with the Sigma 24-70mm ART vs the Tamron 24-70mm G2....For people who want stabilization for Canon full frame, we don't seem to have any other choices, so that would be very helpful to Canon users. thanks....I did ask a question (below) earlier as well. Thanks...
I haven't done the Tamron vs Sigma, yet, but I have done Tamron vs Canon and Sigma vs Canon, as you've seen. They were all shot at the same time, so I could certainly do another, but I think it's pretty clear that the Tamron and Canon are pretty close, but the Sigma lags behind in terms of resolution and AF performance. I also shot the Canon f/4, and that video would be next, if I get to it... but these videos have not been very popular, so I'm not sure there's much demand.
That's a shame not much interest. You do a great job on these reviews too. I do weddings and events full time and you would think there's many full time professionals out there that would find your detailed reviews helpful. Kind of a shame....Thanks...
The issue, as today, the Sigma is about 800 bucks cheaper than the Canon, hence compare the Canon Standard 2.8 vs the Sigma.
very nice. Going with Canon for sure.
I shoot action photography on an eos r how do you think it’ll be? Great video by theway
Hmmm. I'm not sure. With the Canon lens and EF to R adapter, the Canon 24-70 should be just fine for action... in fact, I think that I did a runway shoot with as similar setup in New York a couple of years ago. I don't have a lot of confidence in the AF on the Sigma for shooting sports/action even on native EF, and even less with an adapter.
@@MatthewGore ahh ok just got the r today and with a 50mm it’s amazing think I’m gonna have to just get the canon
Excellent -- did you do Tamron vs Canon?
Yes... the original and the G2 : czcams.com/video/bnXe0s_U9k4/video.html
I used a sigma lens the other day for video and the colours were just inferior to a canon of same spec
I wonder if it's just your Sigma lens. Everybody says these things are so great. I also got a sigma art 50-100 and 16- 35 and they are Phenomenal
You never know. I love most Sigma lenses.
This was not my own lens... it was one that Sigma sent me specifically to review. Would they send me a lens that they hadn't checked out first? Maybe... but usually I get good stuff from them. In general, the type of softness that I found in this lens will go un-noticed by most people anyway.
Luckily, the AF problems that I had can potentially be addressed with firmware updates.
What is the best for weddings?
I'd probably go with the Tamron, or the Canon if you don't think you need the stabilization
Is the cannon ok with a crop sensor? I have an 80d
Yes, they both are (all lenses for full frame will also work on crop, in fact). You will get a different angle of view, though... more like a 35 or 40mm at the wide end.
Can I use sigma 24 to70 lenses for my canon 80d.is it effective in 80 d for general photography
Yes, it is compatible, but since the 80D's sensor is smaller (APS-C), you'll have a narrower angle of view... so it will seem more like a 39-112mm lens. That's fine if you like the telephoto end, but that 38 or 39mm end is not really much of a wide angle. If you want the 24-70 range on your 80D, you're better off going with a 17-50mm f/2.8 lens (or 17-55). The Sigma 17-50 is also a good lens.
@@MatthewGore I am looking for lenses suitable for some small parties,events and portraits. Is that good as all in one.can you suggest a best lense for this situations.and where can I get it,as iam in nz. Some kit lenses doesn't feel good enough In low lights.as I am just beginner ,do not have much knowledge about the lenses. Thanks
@@johnsonparayil1986 Lens choice is very much a matter of personal taste... there's really no right answer for everyone, and as a matter of engineering, there is no perfect lens that is great for everything.
However, for shooting in low light, an f/2.8 lens is good, and an f/1.8 lens is even better. Sigma is the only company that makes a couple of f/1.8 zoom lenses for the 80D, and the 18-35mm f/1.8 is an amazing lens. Great optical quality, great build quality. But even at 35mm, it's not great for portraits. Something like a 50mm f/1.8 or 85mm f/1.8 would be a perfect, inexpensive addition to do portraits, though.
Before I started shooing with only full frame cameras, I shot several weddings with a Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 on one of my cameras, and it was a great range with very good performance. At 50mm it's not bad for portraits, either... though there are better lenses out there. Good luck!
@@MatthewGore thank you for the suggestions.
thank you
yeah I don't like canon cameras but their lens are worth it. I have an sigma 24mm I'm going sell it and get an canon 24 -70 mark 2
thank you! you help me a lot! I just sending the money to buy the sigma...
can you compare canon 85 1.2ii ? thanks
Its on my list, with the new Canon 85 f/1.4L and the Sigma 85 f/1.4 ART
How does the Sigma 24-70 art perform on A7 iii with mc 11 adapter
That's a good question, and I don't know the answer. All of the lenses that I've used with the adapter on my A7RIII have worse autofocus performance when adapted, so it's hard to believe that it would be otherwise with the 24-70. Image quality has not been significantly different with adapted lenses, though.
@@MatthewGore So for wedding we cant reply on the Sigma 24-70 art. Adapted..
As In wedding Auto focus is a issue?
@@as-addkarim1070 As I say, I haven't tested it... so I don't know, but I'd have some reservations.
Hey there, I can recommend the Sigma 24-70 Art on the A7iii with the MC-11. I have this exact setup and the autofocus just never seems to miss. Eye AF included. I don't think you'll have a single issue shooting in a wedding with this combo. I use mine for low light concert photography. The A7iii has nearly flawless autofocus compared to anything else I've ever used. And I know that the E-mount versions of the art lenses work even better than if they were adapted. There are however a couple of negatives with this lens. One being that I'm not quite won over by it's sharpness for the price imo. Yes it's significantly cheaper than some of the competition but I was a little disappointed with the sharpness compared to my 24mm 1.4 art. That being said, I'm used to shooting prime lenses almost exclusively and I think they put a little more effort and magic into other aspects of this lens to make up for it, and honestly sharpness isn't everything. The build quality is excellent, the bokeh is nice, it has some decent weather sealing to name a few. The other negative aspect of this lens is really not exclusive to this piece of glass and that's how heavy it is. It feels so unnatural being so front-heavy with no counterbalance on the relatively compact A7iii body. I'm not used to having to constantly feel like I should be holding up the lens to support all the weight in that spot. It weighs about 2 and a quarter pounds and pretty big in diameter so it's a hefty piece of glass. But in summary I think you'd be pleased with that setup if you are willing to overlook a couple of nitpicks. I know how you feel, it's hard to find much consistent info on this lens and it didn't really get a lot of press. I had the same uncertainty when shopping for one myself so I can relate. Hope this helps!
I would assume the auto focus accuate would be improved on a7III as it use both phase and contrast system to focus rather than just phase detect in dslr.
Music is too noisy I couldn’t complete the video
4:00 That's it I'm done here
Listen Up MR. Gore! I hope to God you are right! Canon rocks here and NO other compareson is out there better than this!.. I bought the canon..wish me luck
how do you like it so far
@@donndonnn well, first I bought it online ery cheap and i got the wrong f4 one. After that I just bought it: by far the best lens i've ever had! Its sharp and with great colours. at 70mm I can get perfect Portraits and at 24mm an ok Landscape shot. the crazy part is: I betrayed Canon and went to sony (A7iii+SIgma mc11adapter) and here it works even better (Photos only)!! The over exposed redish/orangeish from canon is now gone and looks beautiful with the Sony! The Lens itself gives the Premium Canon look and the Sony gives its image quality. Its like magic. I would highly recommend it and if youre lucky: as a used one and in good shape:) i found good deals after for like 1200-1400$ .. Buttom line: yes there are better,sharber lenses with les vigneting and CA.. but do oyu really wannt all these robotic things or do you wanna feel the Photo? I prefer the art and the cinematic look of this lens gives you everything you need as a Photographer. good luck..