yes. I do like. which the reason I went from 80D canon to A7iii Sony. I cant stand RF being not allowing third party.. Now my Sony has sigma 35mm 1.4 DGDN & 85mm 1.4DGDN & Sony 20mm G 1.8. My next lens will be the new upcoming lens sigma 70-200 DGDN . I love Sigma lens. its quality lens, quality image for the fraction of Gmaster lens.
Upon conducting a comprehensive evaluation of multiple photo and video comparisons between the 24-70 f 2.8 Art and RF 24-70 RF L lens, it is my considered opinion that the Sigma lens outperforms the RF L in terms of color accuracy and sharpness. As such, I decided to replace my RF 24-105 f4 L with the Sigma EF Art lens, which I find to be a more compelling option due to its superior color rendition and low-light capabilities. It is worth noting, however, that the Sigma lens does have a reduced number of focus points compared to the RF L, which may impact the autofocus ability of my R6 mkII camera when attempting to focus on specific subjects. Nevertheless, I maintain that the Sigma lens is a superior choice overall based on its exceptional optical performance.
Oh really? I haven't had the pleasure of using the RF 24-70 but that would definitely be a cool comparison to see. I've only seen videos comparing the EF 24-70 to the Sigma 24-70 and in those comparisons the Canon always came out on top. However I would very much like to see someone compare it to the newer RF lens. Thanks for the comment!
@@JakeBorowski15 I highly recommend checking out a comparison video on RUclips. Unfortunately, I can't post the link here, but a quick search for "SIGMA ART 24-70 vs CANON RF 24-70 - CANON R5" should bring it up. From the video, I noticed that the Sigma EF Art lens produced better definition on the leaves of a tree. Additionally, the bokeh was slightly smoother, in my opinion. I couldn't find the comparison for photography use cases, I recall that the contrast was slightly better on the Sigma EF. However, it's worth noting that there were more noticeable lens flares when shooting directly into sunlight, which I can attest for . These flares are generally much smaller than what is experienced on vintage lenses , so I am not bothered much by them .
Do you like 3rd party or native lenses more?
definitely 3rd party lenses, just because of the value you get from them compared to native glass.
@@bhibberdvisuals I agree 100%. The value to money ratio is just better than native lenses.
yes. I do like. which the reason I went from 80D canon to A7iii Sony. I cant stand RF being not allowing third party.. Now my Sony has sigma 35mm 1.4 DGDN & 85mm 1.4DGDN & Sony 20mm G 1.8. My next lens will be the new upcoming lens sigma 70-200 DGDN . I love Sigma lens. its quality lens, quality image for the fraction of Gmaster lens.
@@ulyssessait oh yeah I totally agree the whole RF not allowing third party thing is annoying
Upon conducting a comprehensive evaluation of multiple photo and video comparisons between the 24-70 f 2.8 Art and RF 24-70 RF L lens, it is my considered opinion that the Sigma lens outperforms the RF L in terms of color accuracy and sharpness. As such, I decided to replace my RF 24-105 f4 L with the Sigma EF Art lens, which I find to be a more compelling option due to its superior color rendition and low-light capabilities.
It is worth noting, however, that the Sigma lens does have a reduced number of focus points compared to the RF L, which may impact the autofocus ability of my R6 mkII camera when attempting to focus on specific subjects. Nevertheless, I maintain that the Sigma lens is a superior choice overall based on its exceptional optical performance.
Oh really? I haven't had the pleasure of using the RF 24-70 but that would definitely be a cool comparison to see. I've only seen videos comparing the EF 24-70 to the Sigma 24-70 and in those comparisons the Canon always came out on top. However I would very much like to see someone compare it to the newer RF lens.
Thanks for the comment!
@@JakeBorowski15 I highly recommend checking out a comparison video on RUclips. Unfortunately, I can't post the link here, but a quick search for "SIGMA ART 24-70 vs CANON RF 24-70 - CANON R5" should bring it up.
From the video, I noticed that the Sigma EF Art lens produced better definition on the leaves of a tree. Additionally, the bokeh was slightly smoother, in my opinion.
I couldn't find the comparison for photography use cases, I recall that the contrast was slightly better on the Sigma EF. However, it's worth noting that there were more noticeable lens flares when shooting directly into sunlight, which I can attest for . These flares are generally much smaller than what is experienced on vintage lenses , so I am not bothered much by them .