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
@@gaborkiss1425 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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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 :-)
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.
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
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 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.
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.
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?
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
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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 :)
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.
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?
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?
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?
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.
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
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.
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?
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.
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.
Though I think the Sigma does have a slight edge.. I would buy the Canon. If you search amazon.. they have the canon 24-105 at too high of a price at $1000 whereas the Sigma is $900.. But on Ebay, The canon is found at $600 whereas the Sigma version is at $800.. so on both sites you are saving hundreds of $$$ if you buy the Canon. If this Sigma lens came out some years earlier, I think more people would have been inclined to purchase it. It does seem like a great lens with noticeable improvements over the Canon.. but not quite $200-300 worth of improvements.
+Brian Michael Correct. I bought my EF 24-105 F/4 L IS USM new on eBay for $549 shipped just 3 weeks ago; seller now lists it for $595. Sounds like a great deal, but to be honest, the image quality of mine was just okay and really not as sharp as others are reporting, especially in the corners...very soft.
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.
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
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.
That is very intresting information. I never heard of it until now. Thankyou for sharing.
Great info!
Chris, I don't know what would be the life without your reviews.
Thanks for what you do!
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.
Top quality video for sure. Especially compared to the backlight of the average UA-cam video. I wasn't bored to sit through all 9 minutes.
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.
Respect for these videos man, God bless!
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 = )
Sigma are so underrated & now with the Fp/Fp-L cameras, also from Sigma, it's a win win purchase for hi-res photography.
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 own this sigma with a 60D and a 6D. Is just AMAZING! Lovely!
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
I think the 24-70 F4 is the update to this lens. It's substituting it as a kit lens with many of their ff cameras now
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.
I've been eyeballing this lens for so long and finally bought it thanks to your thorough review! You're the man thanks!
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
Hi Andras, did you get the Sigma 24-105 eventually?
I am now torn between that and the Canon 24-105 L (I, not II), hard to decide.
@@gaborkiss1425 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.
Thanks Christopher, another solid review. You just keep hitting them out of the park!
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.
I love the new Sigma Art lenses. But can you pleaaaasseeeeeeeeee take a look at the Sigma 70-200 2.8 EX DG HSM
?
Yes, please! +1
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.
I don't know why, but that white line on the zoom extension is really bugging me.
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.
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
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.
Canon M50 is APS-C sensor, LOL
And you are getting two FF lenses for it, what
@@SMGJohn Learn how to read. I said I was narrowing it down between the two lenses.
@SMGJohn So? They work on APS-C, don't they?
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 :-)
looks like someone forgot about weather sealing
Superb videos. No nonsense approach and unbiased views. Excellent work man.
Always an excellent review from Christopher. Cheers.
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.
Agree. Every time when I walk around with it it gradually slides to 70-75mm
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
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 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.
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.
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?
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
I have the canon and I really like it. Got it for $520. The differences aren’t enough for me to want the Sigma. Although the IS is much quieter
Thankyou Christopher , a great review and after what you've shown and said about the Sigma lens I think I'll be buying it
Another great review of the next lens I need in my kit 👍👍👍
great test. can do a similar one testing the new canon 24-105 mk2 against the mk1 version?
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.
God bless you for this video! I was really stumped on which one to get
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.
Excellent video Christopher! Thumbs up!
Best review for there two lens. Great job and thanks.
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
@@christopherfrost
On a "fairly" new Canon DSLR, like the 6D MKII, Live View has PDAF, which is very fast.
It's crazy to me that Sigma would cost more than Canon's high end lens
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.
Purchased the Sigma yesterday,very happy! cheers
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.
Is the HSM motor on this 24-105 noisy for external microphone though, when recording videos?
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.
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.
Take a look at my test results here and you'll get a good idea of the image quality differences :-)
Christopher - beautiful reviews as always. If you were to choose one of them for video - which would be your top choice? Thank you!
Probably the Sigma :-)
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 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.
If you mainly shoot flowers then I would get a dedicated 100mm macro lens. Never liked the Canon 24-105 and sold it within a few months.
good to know, thank you. I have a 100mm EF f/2.8 Macro IS USM lens and I love it ! I use the 100mm lens with my Canon 5D mark ii
The lens I use most for flower photography these days is the Sigma 180mm f/2.8 DG, it's a heck of a beast to lug about though.
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.
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 :)
Good info! Thinking of getting one for my FS700
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.
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?
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?
+sigimmer There are lots of options really. I'd go for the 55-250mm STM, or save up for the new Sigma 50-100mm f/1.8
you're a genius at what you do.
thank you brother
Eagerly awaiting a comparison to the new Sony 24-105
You'll be eagerly awaiting for quite a long time!
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?
Don't know that I'm afraid. I've used the Canon 24-105 for a very long time now and it works as perfectly as ever
Hello
What will you suggest to buy Canon mark ii or Sigma, they have similar prices? thanks
I'm not sure if my nucleus nano will like how close that focus ring is to the body..
I cannot wait for you to do a review on the Tamron 15-30 F/2.8 😊
TeK RaVeN I already have, take a look at the Tamron Reviews section on my channel
+Christopher Frost Photography cheers.
Very nice review! Good job!
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.
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
+ntstudio28 They're both fantastic, to be honest, and the 'L' really is more lightweight and portable :-)
Thank you for the nice comparison review! :-)
The canon is not less expensive! It's twice the price of the sigma!
He's talking about the mk I version
Ur a dumbass dude....the mk1 canon L is WAY cheaper than the Sigma lmfaoooo
@@eatassonthefirstdate *you're
(oh, the irony)
And no need to immediately start calling him names, man. :\
you visit the lens 24-70 2.8 made in tamron g2 \art sigma
At last chris 😊😊 thanks for the review, i have been waiting for this since along time ago, happy and blessed marriage my friend 👍👍
would this be a good vlog lens? im looking for something around 18-100 for vlogging and price would be under 1K
Thanks for the review and sharing usefull information.
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 like your excellent pronunciation of "Doppelgänger" :-D
But I also like this review in general.
8:17 why is the sigma on the focused blue book so unsharp??
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?
Sony have just released a new 24-105mm f/4 lens
The different i guess only the sigma neex its docking device for calibrate
great review !!! thanks Chris !
Very good balanced review. Thank you.
What an absolute EXCELLENT video, thank you!
Thanks for the review. It was helpful.
ive heard that the 24-105 canon actually darkens at 105 f4. thus indicating its not a true f4 all the way. did you notice this ?
+ColonelRuiz I've never noticed that really, although it could be true to a small degree
L lens are weather-sealed, aren't they? So the Canon should have the advantage here.
Aron Sch not completely
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.
Ad oggi tra il Canon 24-105 f/4 L (prima versione) ed il Sigma cosa mi consigli??
Just found the Sigma 24-105 second hand for 485 pounds in the Nikon Mount it will go well with my Nikon D750
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.
Zeroplanetz Well, okay, but remember to feed your weather seals.
:D Sorry, couldn't resist.
***** Lol!
Though I think the Sigma does have a slight edge.. I would buy the Canon. If you search amazon.. they have the canon 24-105 at too high of a price at $1000 whereas the Sigma is $900.. But on Ebay, The canon is found at $600 whereas the Sigma version is at $800.. so on both sites you are saving hundreds of $$$ if you buy the Canon.
If this Sigma lens came out some years earlier, I think more people would have been inclined to purchase it. It does seem like a great lens with noticeable improvements over the Canon.. but not quite $200-300 worth of improvements.
+Brian Michael Correct. I bought my EF 24-105 F/4 L IS USM new on eBay for $549 shipped just 3 weeks ago; seller now lists it for $595. Sounds like a great deal, but to be honest, the image quality of mine was just okay and really not as sharp as others are reporting, especially in the corners...very soft.
uscfroadie which is very soft? the canon or sigma?
Brian Michael The Canon.
i think you got this wrong i think video makers will prefer the canon due to the larger focus grip.
Larger focus grip?!
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.
Oh, the focus /ring/ - now I see what he meant.
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!
Good review and comparison, thank you
I am pleased with this lens; it is sharp. Recommended My Nikon D850
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
Watch this video and you'll find out!
How would you stack the Sigma against the Sony E18-105mm f4 G OSS Lens for video?
No idea, I don't test Sony lenses
+Christopher Frost Photography Thanks for the reply!
Should I buy the Canon 24-105 or save up for a 24-70 f/2.8?
Depends what you need - wide aperture, or longer zoom range. Merry Christmas and a happy new year!
Very good review indeed and detail.
Great video...to make a purchase desicion...greetings from Perú...
hi Chris....can i please use the sigma lens on the new m50 mark 2 camera
Perfect comparison video
I think i will go with this sigma for my a5100
where are you looking because this lens retails now for a thousand usd?!
Great review! Spot on
Congratulations! Enjoy your wedding and honeymoon (:
Thanks a lot! It was really helpful!!!