2004: Canon L pro vs. Sigma

For last few days I have been scrolling through some old Japan photos in Lightroom. Many of them I haven't seen for years. Here are a couple from 2004. They are not all that good, but when I saw them I thought of this thread. I was in Nikko on a day trip from Tokyo with several friends. I had been there a few times before, but it was the first time for all of them. I had my Canon Digital Rebel (300D) + Sigma 18-125mm f3.5-5.6 and my French buddy had his Canon 10D + 17-35mm f2.8L + 24-70mm f2.8L + 70-200mm f2.8L IS + big flash (a big, heavy load). A great guy, but he looked sort of askance and dubiously at my little Sigma lens.

Sigma 18-125mm f3.5-5.6

Canon 17-35mm f2.8L

Anyway, later in the day at one point he asked if he could take a few shots with the Sigma so we exchanged lenses for a few minutes. I mounted his Canon 17-35mm f2.8L on my camera and he mounted the Sigma 18-125mm f3.5-5.6 on his. He didn't say, but I am pretty sure he wanted to check it out so that later on his computer he could see how awful it was compared to his pro lenses. Of course, I figured that his pro lenses had much better IQ too, but I knew the little Sigma was actually pretty good. The pro lenses, of course, had faster apertures and were built ruggedly.

I duplicated the same photo I had just taken with the Sigma. As you can see, the exposure and ISO is identical and they were only taken 47 seconds apart. Sure, the Canon Digital Rebel and 10D were just 6.3mp, but you can see the Sigma certainly holds its own with the expensive Canon L pro lens.

Sigma

Canon L

My French buddy trying out my Sigma.