User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  2
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 34

Thread: Canon 24-105L or Sigma 24-70?

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    09 Mar 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    445
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Canon 24-105L or Sigma 24-70?

    Hi,

    Im looking at purchasing a new lens, Im looking at either the Canon 24-105 F4L or Sigma 24-70 F2.8 EX DG

    Ideally I would LOVE the Canon 24-70mm but thats out of my budget, so Im looking at these 2.

    Opinions/thoughts?

    Cheers
    Emma
    Cheers
    Emma

    Avoid shooting with a 12 gauge shotgun. Use a Canon instead.

    Canon 5D, Canon 7D, 50mm 1.4, 18-55mm, Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 VC, Sigma 70-200mm f2.8, 580EX Speedlight. Facebook

  2. #2
    Member Rats01's Avatar
    Join Date
    30 May 2011
    Location
    Wowan
    Posts
    55
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi Emma,
    Deliberated over the same question myself for several weeks and ended up buying the 24-105L. Only had it a week and I think it it is now glued to my 7D forever. I will have to prize my 450D back off my daughter to be able to use my other lenses.

  3. #3
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    09 Mar 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    445
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rats01 View Post
    Hi Emma,
    Deliberated over the same question myself for several weeks and ended up buying the 24-105L. Only had it a week and I think it it is now glued to my 7D forever. I will have to prize my 450D back off my daughter to be able to use my other lenses.
    Do you miss the extra stop the Sigma would give you? Im assuming it would be better in low light situations.

    What won you over to the 24-105 in the end?

  4. #4
    Member twister's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jul 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    54
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If you need f2.8, go for the 24-70L...if you need IS, get the 24-105.

    If you shoot low light, with moving subjects, f2.8 is better, because the IS can only help with camera shake, not with subject movement...

    If you're using a crop camera consider the 17-55/2.8 IS also...

  5. #5
    Fuji Fanatic
    Join Date
    20 Mar 2008
    Location
    Glenorchy
    Posts
    4,040
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The 24-105L is a SUPERB lens. It was my walk around lens when I had Canon bodies. I have used it on 20D, 30D, 1DMkIIN & 1DsMkII and would wholeheartedly recommend it. If you know you are going to be shooting things a bit low light take a tripod or other support.
    Odille

    “Can't keep my eyes from the circling sky”

    My Blog | Canon 1DsMkII | 60D | Tokina 20-35mm f/2.8 AF AT-X PRO | EF50mm f/1.8| Sigma 150-500mm F5-6.3 APO DG OS HSM | Fujifilm X-T1 & X-M1 | Fujinon XC 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 OIS | Fujinon XC 50-230mm F3.5-5.6 OIS | Fujinon XF 18-55mm F2.8-4R LM OIS | tripods, flashes, filters etc ||

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    08 Dec 2009
    Location
    Macleay Island
    Posts
    1,639
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have the Sigma and am very happy with it. The only little drawback I would say is the very large front element. 82mm filter size. Expensive filters. Canon has done the right thing in making a lot of the L series 77mm so that you can interchange filters. The 2.8 is very handy for indoors. Whichever you choose will be a great asset.
    Cheers, Paul.
    Canon 50D w BG l Nifty Fifty l Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 l Sigma 24-70 f2.8 l EF 100mm f2.8 USM Macro l EF 300 f4L IS USM l EF 1.4X ll TC l 430EXII l Vanguard Alto Pro 263 w BH100 l Manfrotto 680B w 234RC l Lowepro Bags.l Sigma EM-140 Ring Flash.

  7. #7
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    09 Mar 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    445
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by twister View Post
    If you need f2.8, go for the 24-70L...if you need IS, get the 24-105.

    If you shoot low light, with moving subjects, f2.8 is better, because the IS can only help with camera shake, not with subject movement...

    If you're using a crop camera consider the 17-55/2.8 IS also...
    Unfortunately the Canon 24-70mm is out of my price range, thats why I was looking at the Sigma. Maybe I'll win lotto haha

  8. #8
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    09 Mar 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    445
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by PH005 View Post
    I have the Sigma and am very happy with it. The only little drawback I would say is the very large front element. 82mm filter size. Expensive filters. Canon has done the right thing in making a lot of the L series 77mm so that you can interchange filters. The 2.8 is very handy for indoors. Whichever you choose will be a great asset.
    Thanks Paul, im leaning towards the Sigma I think.

  9. #9
    Drifter, Racer and Picture Taker
    Join Date
    08 Oct 2010
    Location
    Greenwich
    Posts
    1,708
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have both of these lenses.
    The Sigma 24-70 is used on my Pentax and the 24-105 on my Canon 60D.

    The 24-105 wins out every time and is my default lens. The lens that does almost everything well.
    The IS in the 24-105 is worth around 2-3 stops, so being F4 instead of the Sigma's F2.8, in low light, you won't miss the extra stop, but you'll love the extra reach and image quality of the 24-105.

    If you check the comparisons, the 24-105 is just as good as far as IQ goes as the Canon 24-70, it's just that you get extra reach and the very handy IS.

    I'm not saying the Sigma 24-70 is a poor lens, far from it in fact, but I do have a few quibbles with it like it being so big that it blocks the built-in flash and the filters cost an arm and a leg.
    At least with the Canon 24-105, it uses the same size filters as a lot of other Canon lenses and works so well with the camera.
    All my photos are taken with recycled pixels.
    Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit.
    Wisdom, is knowing not to serve it in a fruit salad.

  10. #10
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    09 Mar 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    445
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks Bennymiata,

    I was just about convinced to go with the Sigma, now im considering the Canon again.

    I want it for portraits, I mainly use my 50mm 1.4 for them, but sometimes I feel like I need it a bit wider for some things.

    Im not worried about it blocking the flash as I never use the onboard one anyway.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    08 Dec 2009
    Location
    Macleay Island
    Posts
    1,639
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    In the end it was only the $$$s that swayed me. I read all the reviews I could find and the Quality of either is not a question. Take your time triptych.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    30 May 2009
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    2,599
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I don't get why the 24-70L is out of your range, it is less than $50 more (not much when you're spending $1700).

    For me, my 24-105L is my most used, default lens...

    Don't be fooled by the extra stop of apperture in the 24-70. It lacks IS which kinda levels it back with the 24-105 (in a way). Yes, I know IS is not helpful for fast movement in low light but, neither is really that sort of lens anyway. Typically, these lenses may be for portrait, landscape or general work where stops of light aren't the biggest issue.

    The IS is very helpful for hand held

    Happy choosing

    Scotty
    Canon 7D : Canon EF 70-200mm f:2.8 L IS II USM - Canon EF 24-105 f:4 L IS USM - Canon EF 50mm f:1.8 - Canon EF-s 18-55mm f:3.5-5.6
    Sigma APO 150-500mm f:5-6.3 DG OS HSM
    - Sigma 10-20mm f:3.5 EX DC HSM
    Speedlite 580 EX II - Nissin Di866 II - Yongnuo 460-II x2 - Kenko extension tube set - Canon Extender EF 1.4x II
    Manfroto monopod - SILK 700DX Pro tripod - Remote release - Cokin Z-Pro filter box + Various filters

    Current Social Experiment: CAPRIL - Wearing a cape for the month of April to support Beyond Blue
    Visit me on Flickr

  13. #13
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    09 Mar 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    445
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Scotty72 View Post
    I don't get why the 24-70L is out of your range, it is less than $50 more (not much when you're spending $1700).
    Umm the 24-70L is $1600
    The 24-105L is $1120
    and the Sigma $849

    Thats quite a difference in price.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    23 Jul 2009
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    659
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I had a 24-105 for a little while, then I sold it and bought a 17-55, and while I thinks the 17-55 is a better lens, I do miss the extra reach, so I'm thinking of going the 24-70 also, and like you, I can't afford the canon, and for half the price, I think the sigma will be fine.

    I should mention that I hired a canon 24-70 about a month ago, it probably needs servicing, or maybe it just wasn't a so called "good copy", but @ 24mm 2.8 this lens sucked big time, very soft.

    If it's mainly for portraits, and you're using off camera flash, IS isn't really necessary
    Jayde

    Honest CC whether good or bad, is much appreciated.
    Love and enjoy photography, but won't be giving up my day job.

    Flickr

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    05 May 2010
    Location
    Moonambel.
    Posts
    76
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I did own both of these lenses,have now sold the Sigma - was mainly used as my general walk around lens , but since I purchased the 24-105L it was never used . I found that the quality of the shots taken with the 24-105L continually out performed the Sigma - not Knocking the Sigma because at its price I think it is quite a good lens - a downside is the price of filters to fit it. For a general purpose lens and a a good travel lens I would highly recomend the Canon.
    Mike
    Canon 5DmkII, Canon 1DmkIIN, EF 24-105 f4LIS, EF 70-200 f2.8LIS, EF 135 f2L,EF 300 f4LIS, EF 17-40 f4L, EF 100 f2.8 Macro USM, Sigma 50 f1.4 EXDG, 580EX & 420EX,Cokin P filters.
    Tamrac Ultra Pro 17 bag,Lowpro Toploader 75AW,Lowpro Outback 200 belt pack,Black Rapid RS-5 and R-3,Aperture 3,Elements 8.
    Wacom Intuos 4 tablet.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    06 Oct 2009
    Location
    Clayfield QLD
    Posts
    278
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I would also reconmend the 24-105, a brilliant lens, had no problem indoors with stationarly subjects, I actaully find my 17-55 2.8 hunts more then this lens for focus in the same light.

    I am missing it at the moment, as IS has died and getting the "error1" message, apparently a common problem with older versions.
    I have this silly idea, that I should actually go and take photos with all this photography gear I have already accumulated, before I collect any more!

    See some of my photos here.
    https://www.facebook.com/pages/David...5888662?ref=hl
    And my very randomly updated blog.
    http://davidarnold.wordpress.com/

  17. #17
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    06 Jul 2010
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    923
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If you already have a 50mm 1.4, I don't really see the point of Sigma 24-70.

    The Canon 24-105L IS has better reach plus IS. It's a versatile lens even on a crop body.

    By the way, a second hand Canon 24-70L is around $1200.

    I had/am having both the 24-70L, Sigma 24-70, Sigma 24-70 with IF (internal focus) and 24-105L, and my many concern of a lens is always about difference in color,sharpness and contrast. (weight or speed of AF or noisy AF etc never worries me)

    The old Sigma 24-70 is sxxx house....
    The new Sigma 24-70 EX is much better lens
    but the 24-105L is just slightly better with everything! Color rendering and contrast etc..... and I love the IS as a walk around.



    (p.s. now if you care to read further...
    BUT I do have a walk around camera Sony NEX5) so walk around is not my concern when my Canon is with me.

    THE 24-70L has defeated all of above and stayed in my bag for good. I even rid of the second hand one I got, and buy a brand new one with Mac extended warranty. When the 24-70 is attached, it only do 1 thing and 1 thing only - close range portrait)

  18. #18
    Member Rats01's Avatar
    Join Date
    30 May 2011
    Location
    Wowan
    Posts
    55
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think the IS won me in the end as I'm not as steady now as I used to be and really preferred the extra range. A large percentage or my handheld shots I take are with my Canon 10-22. Above these any walk-around shots I normally use a monopod for stability.

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    30 May 2009
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    2,599
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by triptych View Post
    Umm the 24-70L is $1600
    The 24-105L is $1120
    and the Sigma $849

    Thats quite a difference in price.
    You said the canon 24-70 L was out of your price range, but you were considering the canon 24-105 L.

    These two are about the same price, so that is what did not make sense.

    Perhaps you are talking of the grey market. Good luck with that Heard too many horror stories there... Remember, there are often good and bad copies of lenses, I'll let you guess where the bad ones are more likely to go... also, you can more easily return your bad copy to a real shop.

    Even so, the grey market for both canons bring them both down to about $1100-1200.

    Buying from legit stores or grey market: If you can afford the Canon 24-105L then, you can afford the Canon 24-70L

    Anyway...

    From my experience, the sigmas are good at mid range appertures... where they fall over is wide open. Therefore, I think that getting a Sigma where you are intending to use it at f:2.8 is sort of defeating the purpose. If you intend to use it for tripod work, f:8 shooting landscapes - it will likely be great but, it is a bit silly to spend all the extra $$$ to get a lens that can do 2.8. If you are wanting to use the siggy for indoor, low light where you may need f:2.8 - you WILL be disapointed and would therefore get either of the Canons.

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    28 Aug 2008
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,913
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Perhaps you are talking of the grey market. Good luck with that Heard too many horror stories there... Remember, there are often good and bad copies of lenses, I'll let you guess where the bad ones are more likely to go... also, you can more easily return your bad copy to a real shop.
    is it just me or u seem to make assumptions or opinions and pass it off as fact???

    so bad or defect lenses go straight to grey importers and the good ones go to local retailers in AUS or US and around the world? Last time I checked, they all came from the same factories and from the same batches and date coded. You dont think lenses from a store in Aus can and sometimes is tainted by some defect too? Pleaseeeeeeeeee

    Also, the 24-105 is $1117 from D-D-Photographics, can pick up in stores in Melb, Syd and Brissy. The 24-70 L there is $1595, bit of a price difference. The cool thing about it, you can walk in to exchange it if its a defected lens, YAY! Grey imports have never brought the 24-70 L below $1500 new, ever.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •