I remember that Canon lens quite well. Purchased it maybe a year or less since it's release, despite it's high price tag. For 9 years it was my main tool for wide angle images. Back to the time that lens was considered one of the best in its class and it implemented some top quality design and I think it still holds on today very well. I personally don't bother myself with edge to edge sharpness at wider apertures and overally was always more than satisfied with the image quality. And still watching this video I would pick up Canon for it's high contrast and color rendition. It gives that dimentional look of the subject, and yes you are right this lens has a good use also for video work. The only flaws I can think of is really high vinieting wide open (though no surprise here for 24mm) and quite anoying original lens hood, never liked the locking "mechanism". Other than that lens is just wonderful. Can only h8ghly recomend it.
Yup, I started with the Sigma for a few years and I recently picked up the Canon. I actually prefer the Canon over the sigma. There is a lot of character happening when doing video. I also enjoy the near to silent AF on the Canon than the sigma. That clicking sound on the sigma drove me nuts~! Ever since buying the Canon, I am on a search for other old school Canon glass. There is a lot of character going on. No wonder they are still making these lenses.
@@theCameraVille This Canon 24mm 1.4L Mark II is also the sibling with the vintage legend Canon 35mm 1.4L Mark I. They share the same character, which having somewhat 3d pop despite having worse CA comparing to Sigma. Sigma rendition is very flat to me even with razor sharpness. Now we have to consider if CA is acceptable for you as CA could ruin your picture in a lot of situations. If CA is not a thing, Canon surely delivers much better image emotion.
Oh gosh. I would kept the Sigma if it didnt had that noise. click click click. The AF was soo loud you can hear it in the video audio. The canon makes noise but far far less. Near silent. For video shooters, Canon. For photo, sigma.
@@Lifetogo Yup, not a problem! I had both lens for 3 months and if sigma would had used a better motor ( reduce the clicking focusing noise) I would had gone for sigma but the Canon is really nice.
I think around @10:00 you got the Sigma on the left on the Canon on the right which is named wrong I think .. cos on the next image you got it as Canon/Sigma. Nice one.
Hey Melody. Thank you for checking the full test! I flip it around on purpose to make sure people are paying attetion and taking notes in the end. Im glad I got you thinking. Cheers!
10:35 If it was the same distance to the object, then Sigma looks like 28mm if to compare with Canon. 8:05 Canon Bokeh definitely beats Sigma. At f/2 Canon Bokeh is almost as more as twice than Sigma. On other hand Sigma is sharper, but with focus breathing. What to choose? 🤔 What's the lowest shutter speed in low light, like Las Vegas street light, situation without smearing an image sharpness? I have Tamron 35mm f/1.8 VC. The stabilization can hold 1/15 shutter speed (hand held) without losing sharpness.
Vegas, damn. I will say Canon since you can always over sharpen in post. So many great outlets these days to do so. You cant fake the bokah in programs.
@@theCameraVille So, What's in your experience the lowest shutter speed in low light situation without smearing an image sharpness? BTW, if you sharp a smudge, it will be just a grainy smudge.
I remember that Canon lens quite well. Purchased it maybe a year or less since it's release, despite it's high price tag. For 9 years it was my main tool for wide angle images. Back to the time that lens was considered one of the best in its class and it implemented some top quality design and I think it still holds on today very well. I personally don't bother myself with edge to edge sharpness at wider apertures and overally was always more than satisfied with the image quality. And still watching this video I would pick up Canon for it's high contrast and color rendition. It gives that dimentional look of the subject, and yes you are right this lens has a good use also for video work. The only flaws I can think of is really high vinieting wide open (though no surprise here for 24mm) and quite anoying original lens hood, never liked the locking "mechanism". Other than that lens is just wonderful. Can only h8ghly recomend it.
Yup, I started with the Sigma for a few years and I recently picked up the Canon. I actually prefer the Canon over the sigma. There is a lot of character happening when doing video. I also enjoy the near to silent AF on the Canon than the sigma. That clicking sound on the sigma drove me nuts~!
Ever since buying the Canon, I am on a search for other old school Canon glass. There is a lot of character going on. No wonder they are still making these lenses.
@@theCameraVille This Canon 24mm 1.4L Mark II is also the sibling with the vintage legend Canon 35mm 1.4L Mark I. They share the same character, which having somewhat 3d pop despite having worse CA comparing to Sigma. Sigma rendition is very flat to me even with razor sharpness. Now we have to consider if CA is acceptable for you as CA could ruin your picture in a lot of situations. If CA is not a thing, Canon surely delivers much better image emotion.
Thank you for your work. What about the autofocus noise?
Very loud or „silent“?
All the best,
Daniel and Jessi
Oh gosh. I would kept the Sigma if it didnt had that noise. click click click. The AF was soo loud you can hear it in the video audio. The canon makes noise but far far less. Near silent. For video shooters, Canon. For photo, sigma.
@@theCameraVille Thank you very much for the fast and definite reply? Will go for the Canon as my low light lens. 🙏
@@Lifetogo Yup, not a problem! I had both lens for 3 months and if sigma would had used a better motor ( reduce the clicking focusing noise) I would had gone for sigma but the Canon is really nice.
@@theCameraVille 🙏
I think around @10:00 you got the Sigma on the left on the Canon on the right which is named wrong I think .. cos on the next image you got it as Canon/Sigma. Nice one.
Hey Melody. Thank you for checking the full test! I flip it around on purpose to make sure people are paying attetion and taking notes in the end. Im glad I got you thinking. Cheers!
10:35 If it was the same distance to the object, then Sigma looks like 28mm if to compare with Canon.
8:05 Canon Bokeh definitely beats Sigma. At f/2 Canon Bokeh is almost as more as twice than Sigma. On other hand Sigma is sharper, but with focus breathing. What to choose? 🤔
What's the lowest shutter speed in low light, like Las Vegas street light, situation without smearing an image sharpness? I have Tamron 35mm f/1.8 VC. The stabilization can hold 1/15 shutter speed (hand held) without losing sharpness.
Vegas, damn. I will say Canon since you can always over sharpen in post. So many great outlets these days to do so. You cant fake the bokah in programs.
@@theCameraVille So, What's in your experience the lowest shutter speed in low light situation without smearing an image sharpness? BTW, if you sharp a smudge, it will be just a grainy smudge.
Great video What kind of mini tripod are you using when you demonstrate the auto focus sound thanks
amzn.to/37VCeSm
Wanted to see autofocus comparison
Canon is the best, which is why I returned the Sigma.
3:02 green tree on the right top. Canon is a mushed potato.
😂😂😂😂