Sigma 24-70mm HSM vs Canon 24-70mm L, review. Call for feedback.

[CrackedButter]

Because I actually get a lot of interest to my blog for my last lens review, I want to do another and I've not seen a lot of head to head reviews concerning Sigma's new 24-70mm HSM lens vs its actual Canon opposite.

I'm beginning to write the review and this time I would like people if they are interested, in telling me they might want to see in such a review. I also have a Canon 24mm L prime thrown into the mix so I hope it will be quite exhaustive.

I don't have any advertising on my site so this isn't an attempt to get a lot of hits, I'm doing this purely for the love of being a gear head plus I have lots of time coming up next week.

Thanks.

 

[Edge100]

Because I actually get a lot of interest to my blog for my last lens review, I want to do another and I've not seen a lot of head to head reviews concerning Sigma's new 24-70mm HSM lens vs its actual Canon opposite.

I'm beginning to write the review and this time I would like people if they are interested, in telling me they might want to see in such a review. I also have a Canon 24mm L prime thrown into the mix so I hope it will be quite exhaustive.

I don't have any advertising on my site so this isn't an attempt to get a lot of hits, I'm doing this purely for the love of being a gear head plus I have lots of time coming up next week.

Thanks.

I would definitely be interested in this review. The things I'd be particularly interested in are:

- AF performance (speed and accuracy), since this is one of the key concerns about Sigma's gear...would suggest manually focussing each lens to infinity, and then autofocusing on a specific object at, say 5ft, 10ft, and 20ft, using centre focus point, and repeating this 5-10 times for each lens. This would show how good AF performance is at different distances, and how repeatable the performance is (some Sigma's have good AF performance at short distances but poor AF at longer distances, or vice versa)
- centre and edge sharpness at f/2.8 at 24, 35, 50, and 70mm
- weight and size
- barrel distortion at 24mm
- qualitative analysis of bokeh at f/2.8

Including the 24 f/1.4L is a great idea.

Looking forward to this review. I've heard great things about the new Sigma 24-70, and, oddly enough, am in the market for a fast standard zoom.

 

[CrackedButter]

Oh great idea, thanks. Wouldn't have done that kind of test, glad I asked now.

 

[Abyssgh0st]

In addition to the other stuff, if you compare build quality, included accesories and what not I'd appreciate that as well.

 

[toxic]

how about putting a mid-frame (or whatever it's called) crop, about halfway between the center and edge...where you actually put the subject, you know?

if either lens focuses improperly, make sure to do tests with MF, so we know what the lens is actually capable of.

and if you test bokeh, please use a reasonably busy/detailed background. some people are convinced that bokeh is only judged by specular highlights, which it isn't.

 

[CrackedButter]

how about putting a mid-frame (or whatever it's called) crop, about halfway between the center and edge...where you actually put the subject, you know?

if either lens focuses improperly, make sure to do tests with MF, so we know what the lens is actually capable of.

and if you test bokeh, please use a reasonably busy/detailed background. some people are convinced that bokeh is only judged by specular highlights, which it isn't.

I think you need to tell me what its called, this mid frame thingy. Don't worry about the bokeh, I'm aware of this and it annoys me too when people do this.

 

[gnd]

how about putting a mid-frame (or whatever it's called) crop, about halfway between the center and edge...where you actually put the subject, you know?

I think you need to tell me what its called, this mid frame thingy.

I think he's talking about the rule-of-thirds intersection.