Sigma vs Canon Telephoto Zoom Lenses: Round 2

Update: Answers are below.

During round one of our test of Sigma vs Canon, not many of you guessed correctly. Indeed, there were even complaints about the test. We’ve listened to these complaints and did the test again. Let’s see if you can tell the difference now. Hit the jump to see the images.

Conditions

- Camera used was the 5D Mk II.

- Lenses are the Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8 EX OS vs the venerable Canon 80-200mm F/2.8 L “Magic Drainpipe”

- My 430 EX II was bounced off the ceiling for extra illumination.

- All images shot at ISO 800.

- The lenses were set to 100mm at F/2.8 and then again at F/4.

- The same focusing point was used in all photos: on the cabbage.

- White balance was set to 3800K, but the color changed for each image as the f-stop changed.

- The images were put into Photoshop Elements and stripped of their EXIF data. No resizing was done but they were exported at 60% quality for ease of loading on the web. The images were shot at full resolution RAWs and then converted into JPEGS.

Now here are the images. Can you distinguish which one is from a brand new Sigma lens and which is from a 20-something year old Canon lens?

F/2.8

Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8 EX OS

Canon 80-200mm F/2.8 L "Magic Drainpipe"

F/4

Canon 80-200mm F/2.8 L "Magic Drainpipe"

Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8 EX OS

Now tell us which one is which in the comments below.

Please Support The Phoblographer

We love to bring you guys the latest and greatest news and gear related stuff. However, we can’t keep doing that unless we have your continued support. If you would like to purchase any of the items mentioned, please do so by clicking our links first and then purchasing the items as we then get a small portion of the sale to help run the website.

Also, please follow us on Facebook, Flickr and Twitter.

Tagged as: 5d m II, 80-200mm f2.8 L, canon, lenses, sharpness test, sigma, Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8 EX APO DG HSM OS

http://www.lucasfreight.com Adam

f/2.8 canon on right
f/4 canon on left

they are just sharper!
- http://thephoblographer.wordpress.com Chris Gampat
  
  Is that your final answer? You’re really willing to say that a 20 year old lens beats out a brand new Sigma?
  - http://www.lucasfreight.com Adam
    
    yep!
C

I’m going to guess that the Sigma took pictures cvs1 and cvs2. The only reason for this is that the orange peel looks sharper on those, and I’ve read that the Sigma lens tends to front-focus slightly.
Marc

2.8 canon left4
canon right
Stacy

What’s the purpose of this test? To prove that a brand new lens beats out a 20-year-old used lens that has seen who knows how much wear and tear and damage to its glass/calibration? If you really want to do a test that matters, compare it to an equally new Canon 70-200 2.8L.

It seems like you’re intentionally deceiving people who think that you’re comparing like to like. Nowhere in your original post do you mention the age and usage differences between the two lenses you’re comparing, and you only briefly mention it in this one. I haven’t the foggiest why you would do this, unless you’re trying really hard to sell the Sigma for some reason, but it’s pretty misleading, and it certainly doesn’t tell us anything about how the Sigma would perform against a modern day Canon equivalent.
- http://thephoblographer.wordpress.com Chris Gampat
  
  Hi Stacy,
  
  The purpose of the test is to see if you can actually tell the difference. If you can’t, then your clients most likely will not be able to either despite the fact that many photographers and people interested in such lenses sit here and pixel peep all day every day. People that would opt for the Sigma version of the lens are those that want a more affordable option. Since such is the case, the older 80-200mm F/2.8 L would be a viable option as it was for me when I purchased mine.
  
  There is no intentional deceiving going on, as soon as I say 80-200mm F/2.8 L “Magic Drainpipe” it should ring a bell that says that this isn’t the newer versions of the Canon 70-200mm F/2.8. My audience is typically smart enough to open another tab and type that into google to check it out. If I wanted to deceive my readers, I’d say nothing else but 80-200mm F/2.8 L with readers thinking that I probably made a typo error. However, we’ve never deceived our readers.
  
  The Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8 EX OS field review is being completed. We’re currently on day 3, but this week we decided to push out the Leica D-LUX 5 review for reasons that many readers here have been typing in Panasonic LX-5 into the search bar. The Leica is the closest thing and long time readers of this site will agree that we cater to our readers demands very often. This was shown in our recent survey as well.
  
  Thank you,
  Chris Gampat
  - Stacy
    
    You can justify it to yourself all you want but it’s very very deceptive, and it completely invalidates the point. If you’re trying to prove that a third-party lens is equal or similar to a Canon L lens in image quality, then you should use a comparable lens. That “drainpipe” of yours isn’t comparable to anything. Go buy a Canon 70-200 2.8 and do the test, then then you be smug about the results you get.
- acanonitemen
  
  on the contrary i feel it is the opposite, a twenty year old lens still makes its mark when compared to its junior!
  - http://asiab3.com Robbie
    
    Until this article I did not know that an 80-200L was ever manufactured by Canon… I find that the broader point about pixel-peeping and end result IQ very important; the images at the end of the day are more important than the image one makes of themselves while they are shooting with their fancy new lens. I appreciate that this review isn’t a shootout of the latest and greatest from every brand, but a comparison of something new with something proven with time.
    - http://thephoblographer.wordpress.com Chris Gampat
      
      Hi Robbie,
      
      I appreciate the fact that you were one of the few able to see past all the hype.
Thepher

In cvs3 you missed focus. Your subjects are less sharp because you focused behind them.
- http://thephoblographer.wordpress.com Chris Gampat
  
  Focused on the same spot for each image.
TaoTeJared

I shoot Nikon so I could really care less but Great Test idea!

I’ll take a shot 2.8 Sigma right – 4.0 Sigma left.

Sigma’s Pro line are sharp for sure. I have bought Sigma lenses in the past and did not like their build quality with flaky paint. CAs are usually bad, distortion was average & Fluorite lenses seems to put a green hue on things. I’ll admit I’m very observant of CAs and distortion more so then most. That said, their Pro lenses fair much, much better for sure.

I think there should be more blind tests on lenses and cameras to illustrate that lenses, cameras, etc are so close that playing the #s game is nothing more than splitting hairs and ignoring practicality.
http://www.lucasfreight.com Adam

thats another cookie you owe me then…
caliswain

in the 2.8, the Sigma shot if back focused compared to the Canon shot…