1DC: The Digital Picture Sigma 24-105mm OS preview

AndreeOnline

AndreeOnline

Veteran
Bryan over at TheDigitalPicture has a preview of the Sigma 24-105 where he has been shooting charts for some clinical comparisons.

Sharpness wise, the Sigma is marginally better at 24mm and the Canon owns the Sigma with about the same amount at 105mm. The differences are small enough to not be a factor in real life shootings. I feel they are about same in contrast with a nod to the Canon.

While not a bad lens, in a direct comparison to the Canon 24-105mm there is very little between them. It won't go down as another head turner like recent 35mm 1.4 or the 18-35 1.8.

Now the race is on to be the first with a 24-70 2.8 IS with performance to match.
 
Tamron offers a 24-70 with their VC system that's supposed to be pretty good. Everybody seems to think that it's better than the Canon 24-70 mki but not as good as the mkii. Since I use the older 28-70, which is also better than the mki, I've been curious about it. Especially since I can't service the 28-70 anymore and the zoom ring is getting a little stiff.
 
You guys and your 24-70, I swear! ;) I'm speaking in jest here, but am I the only one who feels that range is just too limited for a video zoom? I wish they'd make a 24-105 f2.8 IS. I don't care if it's as big as a 70-200, that's the lens I'd love to have.
 
DNN said:
Tamron offers a 24-70 with their VC system that's supposed to be pretty good. Everybody seems to think that it's better than the Canon 24-70 mki but not as good as the mkii. Since I use the older 28-70, which is also better than the mki, I've been curious about it. Especially since I can't service the 28-70 anymore and the zoom ring is getting a little stiff.
Click to expand...

I had the Tamron and hated it. It breathed way too much when focusing.
 
cowpunk52 said:
You guys and your 24-70, I swear! ;) I'm speaking in jest here, but am I the only one who feels that range is just too limited for a video zoom? I wish they'd make a 24-105 f2.8 IS. I don't care if it's as big as a 70-200, that's the lens I'd love to have.
Click to expand...

Agreed on all! On the AF100, the 24-70 was often my go-to lens. With an effective 48-140, it covered medium to short tele.
Now, I rarely use it on the C100. It's 24-105, 70-200 2.8 (and Tokina 11-16 or Canon 17-35).

24-105 2.8L IS??? Amen, brother! That would be a major thank you for Thanksgiving!!! :thumbsup:
 
cowpunk52 said:
You guys and your 24-70, I swear! ;) I'm speaking in jest here, but am I the only one who feels that range is just too limited for a video zoom? I wish they'd make a 24-105 f2.8 IS. I don't care if it's as big as a 70-200, that's the lens I'd love to have.
Click to expand...

Thats what I want.:grin:
 
cowpunk52 said:
You guys and your 24-70, I swear! ;) I'm speaking in jest here, but am I the only one who feels that range is just too limited for a video zoom? I wish they'd make a 24-105 f2.8 IS. I don't care if it's as big as a 70-200, that's the lens I'd love to have.
Click to expand...
Sure, I guess if we are dreaming, why not? Oh you~
 
Is the Sigma 2.8?

Rumour is sigma is working on a 24-70 2.0 OS

The Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC is cheaper than C 24-70 4 but quality is near the C24-70 2.8
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top