One thing most people dont know, is that the canon is almost perfect parfocal, where as the sigma is not at all. So for video the canon is just magic, you focus once on 24mm and when you zoom in to 105 its still pretty much in focus. Same goes for the 70-200 f4 is.
I love your narration and review style! There's nothing pretentious or narcissist about your approach of these lenses and your observations are very refreshing.
Exactly, the information is given and you don't get the impression that you are being schooled- like someone is being pretentious, because they know more- but you've been given the information and in a accessible way. I love it.
Hi Chris, I always enjoy your reviews, your one of the best on lens reviews and comparisons. You forgot to mention that the Canon 24-105L lens has Dustproof and Waterproof Sealing. Great video Keep up the great work = )
thankyou. I had the Sigma on a d750 for 6 years, and it made great pictures, but i got rid of it last week, fed up of it being so heavy, Also, after being dropped off the bike, the camera survived untouched, but the lens snapped off at the mount. Thankfully, Sigma was able to repair it no problem, but a year later it jammed and had to go back, and when returned it was like new. God will bless you and yours too!
I intended to mention this when I first read your comment about having proposed a month earlier, and my sincerest apologies for the late response to that announcement! Congratulations!!! May the both of you have a long and fruitful life :)
Great comparison review Chris, hope the wedding stuff is going well. You know one thing that boggles my mind is why Canon doesnt update many of their L lenses. I am not talking about a complete overhaul, but a few minor updates here and there. For example the 24-105. Would it really be that hard to add new updated optical coatings to the lens, or perhaps a updated IS system. Not huge update, but minor ones enough to keep their lens more competitive.
I wonder about that too, sometimes! Canon don't tend to update a lens unless they can pull something really special out of the bag, though. I hear an update of the 35mm f/1.4 is coming, though :-)
Joe's Photo & Video Blog I think that with all the cell phone cameras improving out there, people who buy Point & Shoot cameras, and DSLRs will be less. Less people will dabble in DSLRs because they will get by with their cell phones. Less people buying equipment means less people enhancing their skills to buy high end equipment, which will take the biggest hit, since that is a niche market to begin with.
sjs So far DSLR's (key word: "so far", lol) are still selling strong, even still above the mirror-less market. But I expect that to change over the next 3 to 5 years. However the compact/ portable camera market is hurting bad. Canon just had to re-adjust its quarterly projections because of poor sells from their entry level cameras. But IMHO thats Canons fault, they got 43 difference models of powershot cameras (which includes the G series) Manufacturing cost is eating up their profit. If they scaled back to only 4 PowerShot cameras. They would greatly improve earnings. The basic $99 camera is DEAD gone, replaced by smartphones and iPods. So yea, I agree with part of what your saying. However, smartphones still take crap photos. I can see this changing to a degree in the future, but keep in mind when SmartPhone cameras get better, DSLR and ML cameras will have gotten even better also.. Cheers, Joe
Yasser Sultan I think that was what it was meant to be. Plus lighter and smaller. However optically they are very close and no real reason to get the 24-70 over the 24-105. At least from a still photo stand point.
Hi Chris! First of all, I'd like to state how much I like your videos, through them you've helped me a tremendous amount. Your work assured me in deciding to transition to Full-Frame from APS-C, and recently I've bought a used 6D mark II. In the last few days I've watched two of your videos back and forth: - Old vs. New: Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 IS USM 'L' ii (2017) - Sigma vs. Canon! Sigma 24-105mm f/4 'Art' (2015) As I understand these lenses are very similar both optically and feature-wise. I've arrived at the conclusion that the Sigma would suite me best. The old Canon is not really available neither used nor as new in Hungary, and the newer one is priced 1.4 times higher than the Sigma. My question towards you is that do you recall any characteristics of the newer Canon that would justify its higher price? Also I do not really know whether it would worth the effort, but would you consider comparing the newer Canon and the Sigma ina video? I wish the very best for you, despite the hardships of this year! Thankfully, Andras
@@gkiss2030 Not long after my comment I've bought a copy, it was a very reliable companion. But for the 6DmkII I used at the time f/4 was quite limiting. Good for travel and landscape but too slow for indoors. Since I've switched to e-mount I only use it reversed as a macro lens of sorts. Great lens for beginners, but but quite heavy so it's a burden to travel or hike with I had the chance to try a Canon 24-105 L mk1 too, compared to the Sigma that was lightweight BUT felt cheap dated and plasticky. After all I won't recommend buying either, save up and get a faster lens a 24-70 f/2.8 preferably.
Alex Wong Tony Northrup has reviewed all the 70-200 f2.8 lenses. Well, not *all* of them, but the best from each SLR-brand maker. Just in case you're interested.
You comment on the Sigma's 'red cast', but I don't think that's a red cast. I think it is the Sigma's greater contrast levels. The yellows and greens in the fuller shot look fine.
I have the Canon 24-105 and find that it go almost 1 stop darker and somewhat out of focus when fully zoomed in. Others have claimed the same. I'm wondering if the Sigma performs better in this regard.
Congratulation Christopher for all your videos and your recent wedding! I'm a great fan, just one remark : in your sharpness testings, you always shoot the same building. No problem with that, but did you notice their is often a part of the roof in the top corners of your frame ? It obviously change the focusing plan, and increases softness, don't you think?
Thank you for the lovely video This is a remarkably well done review: honest, precise and straight to the point. I've just bought the Sigma for video making :-)
Managed to pick up a Sigma 24-105 Art EF for only £250. It shows good signs of use but its the performance that matters and for the money I can't complain
Thanks for sharing! Great video! I was still up for debate on which lens to buy. Both have good quality and both have bad! I think the Canon in the end won my vote. Thanks again for this review! You should have been a salesman! :)
I love your reviews Christopher! I'm narrowing it down between the Sigma 24-105 f4 Art and the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 Art to be used primarily for video making on my Canon M50.
I wish I had rewatched this comparison breakdown BEFORE yesterday. 😂 Actually, I bought the Canon 24-105mm f/4 L II version for $648. I know you compared the L I version in your video, but I could have spent $500 vs. $648 and used that extra $148 difference to still have GREAT image quality and use the savings towards buying me an additional lens. Will be looking at getting a 20mm prime that would be better for low light and taking large group shots.
Hai Christopher The sigma and canon 24-105mm lenses are great lenses but as a nikon use i have no choice among these lenses i purchased the Sigma lens for my d810 and d4 it realy shines on the d810 i was warned by other photographers to not to have it on D810 because this lens is no justification for the d810 sensors resolution i said nonsense it is very good on the D810 i can crop 100% and still have fine detail
Nice review! I bought the Canon 24-105 mm when it came out. For much more money then the lens cost nowadays. It is a very nice all round zoom, not to heavy and the IS is good for me (I only shoot stills). But the build quality has a one big disadvantage, it does not have a lock switch. After a few years my copy began to creep. And that is very annoying, especially for an walk around zoom. First I tried to fix it with an elastic and now I put a thin piece of tape on the part that comes out. It works, but is that L quality? Needless to say I love that little Canon zoom off course :) I have great Sigma Art lens, the 50 mm F1.4. I pass on this one.
Hi, The sigma 24-105 f4 is a super sharp lens at Centre ... but the border are soft even at f8/f11... I would not recommend this lens for group shots ... where as the Tamron 24-70 f2.8 G2 is the beast at f2.8 the sharpness is at Centre n not at borders but @ f4 onwards the sharpness is great all over the frame ... n this Tamron 24-70 g2 is recommend for all purpose either indoor n out door as well ... just try this lens ....its worth
Thanks for the great video Chris. I do everyday photography, wedding and other event photography. I have EOS R5 and confused to get a lens. which one do you suggest ? Sigma 24-70 F2.8 Art lens with RF adaptor or Canon RF 24-105 F4L
I'm a bit torn because I was excited to be picking up my very first L lens and long wanted 24-105 canon lens in the morning.. of course you've got me second guessing this decision.. darn you sir.. that freakin' voice doesn't help! I still believe everything you say lol
I have a question. Presently I am shooting a Canon 80D with the Canon EFS 18-135 mm f3.5/5.6 IS USM lens, and I'm thinking about upgrading to the Sigma 24-105 f4 Art. I'm having issues with fine focusing on the Canon lens and am wondering if it's worth it to upgrade to the Sigma. How much better is it really? The Canon is a kit lens and I'm just wondering how much better this Sigma is. I have the Sigma 50 f1.4 and the Sigma 105mm f2.8 macro and they are very good and I get excellent results with them. Thank you for your time.
I wish I could buy the sigma but they are using 82mm filters and I can't change a full kit of 77mm (very expensive) infrared, polarization and ND filters.
Thanks for a great review. Have heard from other sources that sigma lens is much better. It clear that it is not as large optically benefits between these two. Keep up the good work :)
Very nice video thank you so much for the information. In Greece the pricing is actually the opposite. The sigma lens comes at about 300-400 € cheaper than the canon lens and I was looking for an alternative purchase that fits my budget. I’m happy to know that their performance is so similar and I’m probably going for the sigma.
First off, thank you. You are always class act. I just wanted to chime in about my experience with the ART series. I have been a recent cheerleader for this series. But I have recently returned the 35 and 50 ART lenses. In good light and under 10' these lenses were blissful to use at 1.4. But I realized that low light focus and infinity focus were completely unacceptable for me in terms of hit ratio. I spent hours using the USB doc to get them "right" to no avail. Considering how sharp these lenses were, I was quite unhappy to let them go. I have tried the 24-105 and was just as impressed with the IQ. Unfortunately I did not have the time to really evaluate the AF properly. To be honest, I spent more time than I wanted to with the primes and the USB doc. Replicating that process with many more points to calibrate on a zoom is not my idea of fun if the end result is the same as the primes. I want so badly to love the ART series. Still torn on trying this lens as I find the performance of the Canon to be underwhelming in my testing. Thank you again for the service you provide.
+Topper McFly It's such a shame you've had a bad experience - that can be frustrating. One option (which is quite slow) is to use live view autofocus in critical situations - that is always very accurate
Below 24mm the unavoidable perspective distortion is very annoying. The 105mm is nice telephoto focal length for portraits and distant objects. Much better than the 70mm. The Canon 24-105mm is the kit lens of Canon full frame cameras and Sigma a cheaper replacement. My opinion is that the Sigma 24-105 is a great travel lens. Without the quality issues of all super telephoto lens and with a versatile useful focal length range.
Thanks! Do you find that the AF smooth for video work? Also, you mentioned about the AF + image stabilisation sound, but will be picked up by a on camera shotgun mic?
Brilliant review, thank you, Christopher. I love and prefer Sigma lenses over Canon. I own and love the 50mm Art Series EF and 14mm-24mm Art EF (this one is a work horse and gets used everyday on real estate and architecture shoots). Love them. Next up is the Sigma 24-105.
For any practical video work, you are not (or rarely) going to be using a shot that involves zooming so for me the backwards setup of Sigma's arrangement of zoom and focus rings was awful. Most camera's have the manual focus be the larger ring that is further from the body and easier to grab ... not only was sigmas opposite, but for some reason they made the focal ring stupidly narrow and difficult to adjust.
You mentioned that sigma had some production issues with the 24-105 art lens. Can you please tell me what happened and if it was solved? Thanks in advance.
I have the Sigma. I was skeptical of it because of Sigma's reputation from years past. But I love love love love the Sigma 25-105. Just a great all around lens. The only people who might want to give it a pass would be owners of a good 24-70 f2.8, but those don't have image stabiization for video work.
Could someone help me figure this out... 🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔 Im closely observing the flare test, but I cant see how the Sigma is better.... Canon has nicer richer tones, while keeping, sharpness and more contrast. While the Sigma has a strange green cast and looks just terrible... The same happens with Sigma 17-50 2.8 vs Canon Least expensive Prime lenses. To me this is important, becase I do shoot many back lit situations. And end up having to color correct and use the Dehaze tool. its a pain and takes 5 times longer to edit anything. While with the photos I get with a 50mm 1.8 or an 85mm 1.8, it comes out almost perfect. I dont even have to edit much.
If I understood correctly, the Canon lens is an older design, so they don't need to recoup any of the R&D on it. Looking at B+H, the Canon is a bit more expensive than the Sigma now, but only by $100, unless you step up to the eye watering $1300 for the Mk II version.
thankyou very much , your lens comparison videos are awesome and very useful, i love your videos., can you tell me that which lens is long-lasting in sigma and canon?
Great comparison as always! Question for you, I know someone asked you what would be a good lens to compliment the sigma 18-35 and fill that zoom range. You mentioned the 55-250 would be good, but I don't know how I feel about the variation in sharpness when using the two lenses. Do you think any of these are enough to satisfy that lack of zoom? Or since they will be overlapping between 24-35mm that it's not worth the price of having one of these? Maybe a better quality lens suggestion to fill that lack of zoom of the 18-35?
I want to add the Canon 24-105mm lens to my collection. I like the sigma too. I mainly shoot flower photos so noise is not a bother for me and the less expensive Canon option is more appealing to me.
cool lens the Sigma 180mm but a bit pricey for my budget. I bought my canon 100mm lens used on adorama for half it's new price if I remember correctly.
The focus ring is thin on the Sigma so I might need to go for the Canon for video. Also, having the focus ring closer the the front element is nice too.
So I just bought a second hand sigma 24-105 art and canon 24-70 f2.8 L M1 for my Sony A7 with Sigma Mc-11 adapter. I loved the 24-70 for the bokeh and its quite sharp although the AF doesn't work with the adapter and it's freaking heavy.. I live in Sweden and most part of the day is cloudy or rainy/snowy so the weatherseald and 2.8 on Canon is perfect. Most of my shots have a DOF/bokeh and I love shooting when it snows or rains just to give the moody vibes. But I still can't decide if I want the AF on sigma/sharpness and that it reach out to 105mm although not weatherseald. I will keep only one of them but I really can't decide which one.. Any suggestions?
Chris, that was my very dry attempt at religious humor. Seeing so many unbeliever's these days. Thank you for your informative reviews, which I have made a couple purchases. Now I am looking at the Samyang 800mm and 2x extension with Seymour solar filter for 8/21/17
Thanks for your video! Does your Sigma 24-105 look like it's slightly zooming in and out when you manually focus? I just got my lens today and I'm trying to figure out if it's just an issue I can fix in the USB dock, or an actual issue with the lens. I have no warranty, so I need to return it within 30 days if it's faulty. I'm using it for video, and I think the zoom-effect would be a big problem. Thanks!
+Kate Jones That's called 'focus breathing'. Sorry, I can't remember if it happened on my copy but if it happens on yours then that would be normal for the lens and there's nothing you can do.
OK no problem, thanks! I have never really noticed breathing before, perhaps that is due to the fact that this is my first new lens in quite a while so I'm doing tests and am attentive to any little thing. If that's normal, than no big deal. I wouldn't be able to afford cine lenses. Thanks!
Dear Chris, I am evaluating canon 24-105 f4 ii Vs sigma 24-105 f4. I use is travel and street photography. Night shots important for which 50 1.8 I have. Please suggest. Thank you
I can't make all these random comparison videos people keep asking for. It would take forever! I have a life to lead! Take a look at my reviews and you'll get a good idea about each lens.
What a delight to see the Sigma 24-105mm vs Ef 24-105mm, because I am deliberating between these two!! I think the Sigma looks compelling. Thanks Chris.
I really like and wanted the sigma. The ONLY reason I'm gonna go for the canon is because of the weather seals. I need on thats more dust proof. If sigma was, id be getting that one instead.
Aron Sch sigma's are garbage...Sigma discontinue their lenses constantly and they stop making spare parts so repairs are not an option,when they fail and fail they will. I once made the mistake of purchasing a sigma 28-135 i.s.it failed to stop down,and when i contacted the idiots at sigma they said send it in insured wich costed me $80 . Then sigma fools told me that the lens was discontinued so no parts were available,but they said they could sell me the newest version a 24-105mm . So I told them to go to hell . Then the dumb asses asked if I wanted it returned to me.I told them hell yes stupid. Then I purchased the canon 28-135 i.s. f4.5 and the canon still works today. The sigma just sits in my glass front cabinet as a reminder to never purchase anyones after market crap.