Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX Vs. Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS L 1st im

[CyberDyneSystems]

Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX Vs. Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS L 1st impressions

This is by no means a scientific comparison,. It is more my personal impressions and observations.

*** EDIT*** Original tests were performed on a 10D. I have made a few edits to this review as I have become more familiar with the Canon lens.

1st,. let's look at the ergonomic and handling characteristics.

Understand that I have owned the Sigma for about 8 months compared to days with the Canon,. So I am used to� the Sigma. I admit that this may ''color"� my opinion.

Overall Build Quality: Tie
Both lenses give an equal impression of overall build quality being top notch.

Weight: Winner, Sigma.
The Canon is heavier @ 51.2ounces Vs the Sigmas 43 ounces. I find this amusing as Sigmas are often being referred to as heavy�

The Canon definitely feels heavier!

Controls: Winner, Sigma.
The focus ring and the zoom ring on the Sigma are smoother and more tactile. The focus ring is much larger on the Sigma and the rubberized texture more pleasing to the fine touch. When I use the lens with Manual focus as a macro with rings, this is a help.

Personally I prefer the direction of the Sigmas clockwise rotation to increase zoom magnification to Canons counter clockwise. This is totally one persons opinion,. Leaving this an easy 50/50 as to who prefers what.. but to me there is some logic to turning the ring UP to INCREASE magnification.

The Canon has a more substantial Manual/Auto� focus switch.

The focus gauge window on the Canon is taller, where as the Sigmas is wider. The print on the Canons is bolder larger type. Meters are white on black but feet are green on black making the feet unreadable. Sigma,. Both meters and feet are white on black,. But this creates confusion, as you don't instantly know which is which. I give equal ratings to the zoom mm increment marks, white on black for Sigma and Black on white for Canon. Both legible.

The Canon's Biggest Ergonomic "issue"!
The Focus limit switch, IS switch and manual Vs. AF switch are ALL too "proud" they stick out and essentially get bumped into the wrong position 100% of the time the lens is picked up. This is a common complain with this lens and I am no exception. (interestingly the OLDER 100-400mm IS does NOT suffer the same problem. Pity Canon changed these switches with the newer 70-200mm lens :( )

Accessories: Winner, Sigma.
The Sigmas lens collar can be removed from the lens while the lens is mounted to the body. The Canons cannot. I found this out while the Canon was mounted on my monopod,. I wanted to remove the camera quickly and went to open the collar it doesn't open. However,. The two collars seem about equal in strength,. And the Canons is marginally easier to rotate.

If you have not seen a Sigma EX lens hood,. Then you should. Compared to the flimsy items that Canon is selling the, Sigmas are made of far better materials. Not thin flimsy plastic,. But solid chunks of molded hard plastic that have a built in flat rough texture that will not reflect light as much as the shiny Canon hoods. Also the bayonet mount on the Sigmas seem much more solid.

Canons included nylon case seems a bit more spiffy, but I like the Sigmas hunter green over the Canons really weird 1960s moon launch silver??? Blech.

In use.

Note: that for this test both lenses were used hand held and the Canon's Image Stabilization was always ON

Viewfinder Image: Winner, Canon.
On my 10D, the image in the viewfinder seems brighter with the Canon.

Overall ergonomic impression: Winner, Sigma.
As a general side by side, many of the details above,. Zoom ring, focus ring and especially weight, the Sigma seems an easier lens to pick up and shoot with hand held. The Canon is a LOT heavier than I was expecting. It is nearly 8 ounces heavier than the Sigma.

Compare this to the “Monster� Sigma 50-500mm EX Zoom,. Which weighs in at 58 ounces,… which means it is only 6 ounces heavier than the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS.

...Remember, the 50-500mm requires a trailer,... so at 51.2 ounces the Canon could benefit from a roof top cargo rack at the least!

Image Stabilization: Winner, Canon.
This is the first IS lens I have owned. I have had occasion to use a few others briefly,. But in most cases I was shooting from a tripod anyway. This is gives the Canon a clear, undisputed advantage over the Sigma. The question is how much is it worth. There are IS features built into cameras that cost one quarter the cost of the 70-200mm IS,. So I am not sure why it needs to come at such a premium. There is a $700.00 or so price difference between the two Canon versions of this lens. And yet the new IS version of the 300mm f/4 costs no more than the old non IS version did?

Image Stabilization is a boon indeed. As my image quality comparison is in fact only at the beginning stages,. I cannot yet offer my opinion on how much it affects the performance of the lens. But I can tell you it is amazing. I am sure there will be many conditions under which the IS will be a great advantage.

AutoFocus Speed: Canon! (for now)

From my initial use,. it seems to me that the IS function slows down the Canon from a cold start. But this does not change the fact that the Canon focuses faster. The Sigma with it's HSM is no slouch,. but the Canon wins hands down. IMHO the Canon is the fastest focusing Zoom I have ever used

Autofocus Accuracy: Stand Still Tie?
This really has surprised me. If there was anything I expected to be a lock it would be the Canon AF Accuracy. As it turns out, the Canon is no more perfect than the Sigma. Which in this case for both is excellent!

On The MkII Since writing this review I have attained the 1D MkII The differences become more significant with the focus tests on a MkII body. The 10D it seems does not have the "nards" to fully realize the potential of the Canon's focus speed and accuracy.

AutoFocus tracking: Canon, Canon, Canon
The Canon simply rules here. This lens is Canon's best Zoom lens at focus tracking. Period. On the MkII it is positively unreal. Keeping up with some of the best Primes, no mean feat for any Zoom.

Please Note: A few months back I reported some odd AF accuracy problems with the Sigma that seemed to crop up out of no where. Upon further investigation,. I realized that all issues disappeared when the UV filter I was using was removed. Since then no problems at all. For this reason both lenses I am using in the field with no filter (being VERY careful )


Image Quality: NO WINNER . Yet!
I have used the Canon far to little so far to say which I find has better image quality. What I can say at this point is that the two lenses are EXTREMELY close! In fact,. on the one side this is what I was expecting,.

...but in my heart of hearts I was hoping that the Canon would blow my mind in the same way that my first experience with a fast telephoto Prime lens did.

Well it did not. So the improvement, if any, is marginal at best. The Canon is sharper wide open. Here is the noticeable difference, but by f/4 they are too close to tell.

Below are four images taken the same day with both lenses. (although the sun was setting fast so the lighting does change)
For now I leave it up to you to decide which is taken with which lens.

Can you tell?


http://images.fotopic.net/?id=2198127&outx=980&oq=0&noresize=1&nostamp=1

http://images.fotopic.net/?id=2198124&outx=980&oq=0&noresize=1&nostamp=1

http://images.fotopic.net/?id=2198125&outx=980&oq=0&noresize=1&nostamp=1

http://images.fotopic.net/?id=2198126&outx=980&oq=0&noresize=1&nostamp=1



**Just adding some example images to check out:
From the EF;
http://images.fotopic.net/?iid=yefyt3&outx=600&noresize=1

http://images.fotopic.net/?iid=yf0nz0&outx=600&noresize=1

And more;
http://newfoundland.fotopic.net/p10870980.html
http://newfoundland.fotopic.net/p10870981.html


Some performance samples
http://carmenpremier.fotopic.net/p5023608.html
http://carmenpremier.fotopic.net/p5023639.html
http://carmenpremier.fotopic.net/p5023644.html
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/p4638500.html
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/p4402370.html

[PaulB]

The direction of rotation of the various control rings is VERY important when you are swopping lenses - if you change from one zoom to another and the rings work in opposite ways then it does lead to missed photographs.
I know that this is something which may not be important to non-Pros but believe me when you are under pressure on a job it is.
This consistancy is one reason that most Pros buy lenses made by the camera manufacturer and stick with them - it matters even in these days of AF.

[morenoar]

Ok, here is my guess of the lenses. And I have not used either one of them. The only Sigma lens I used was the 50-500 (and my pictures came out HORRIBEL)
1st one and 3rd one with the Sigma
2nd and 4th with Canon.

But I would LOVE to know if I am right or not. I need to get a GREAT lens for my soccer team pictures. If I can get away with the Sigma Version (cause I will use a tripod or Monopod) and 2x converter, then I can save my money for a Flash unit. Let me know if I was correct or not.

[msnow]

the 4th one is very nice, I'm only going to guess on that one...Canon.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Morenoar,

You'd be wrong. :D

I'm not going to say HOW wrong,. but wrong.... :)

I would like to leave this unanswered for a little longer so that more get a chance at it.

RE: the 4th Image.
Without saying which lens it is,.. I almost did not post that one. I should have posted a Disclaimer... so I will now

4th Image Disclaimer!!!
The advantage that 4th image had was due to the wonderfull lighting I got through a break in the clouds near sunset. It is sort of a "ringer" that image, as it gives a much more pleasing lighting than the others.

So,.. for you just looking the first time,. keep that in mind when you make your guesses. The lighting played a much larger factor on image quality here than did lens choice. (IMHO) You may notice that Morenoar chose the two images with the worst lighting and assumed they were from the Sigma. They are the less pleasing of the four. But it is the lighting that ,makes them that way.

Lastly,. I did not say that there were two of each.... :)

[morenoar]

Hey, I am glad that I am WRONG
Now I know that the Sigma Lens takes GREAT PICS and I can then get it and ge the 2x and save money. Thanks

[CyberDyneSystems]

morenoar wrote:
Hey, I am glad that I am WRONG
Now I know that the Sigma Lens takes GREAT PICS and I can then get it and ge the 2x and save money. Thanks

Morenoar,

You have E-mail :)

[CyberDyneSystems]

PaulB wrote:
The direction of rotation of the various control rings is VERY important when you are swopping lenses - if you change from one zoom to another and the rings work in opposite ways then it does lead to missed photographs.
I know that this is something which may not be important to non-Pros but believe me when you are under pressure on a job it is.
This consistancy is one reason that most Pros buy lenses made by the camera manufacturer and stick with them - it matters even in these days of AF.

Paul, I couldn't agree more. It blows to switch direction on the zoom ring.. and as I say,. which direction an individual prefers I am sure is largely a matter of which you started with.. or whatever ends up influenceing your decision.

My first lenses turned "the canon way" but once my main lenses became the two Sigma's (70-200 & 50-500mm) I quickly adapted and preferred them. Going back to the 17-40mm Canon I allways get turned around. Now I have sold the 50-500mm all that remains is the 70-200mm.. to me all other lenses turn "the wrong way" :D

Fortunately,. no one messes with the focus ring. :) It allways truns the same direction. ( at least in all the lenses I have tried?)

[morenoar]

yes I do.'



morenoar@earthlink.net


Thanks

[Belmondo]

morenoar wrote:
yes I do.'



morenoar@earthlink.net


Thanks

I now pronounce you man and --------

[CyberDyneSystems]

There he goes,. calling me a -------- again!!!!


//jeez Tom,. I'm glad I took the time out of my schedule to type up this nice detailed review for you :D :D I can see by your post it made a big impression ! ROFL! :)

[morenoar]

Belmondo wrote

I now pronounce you man and --------


That would be SENSI and Student

Darth and Luke

He HE He

[Canuck]

PaulB wrote:
The direction of rotation of the various control rings is VERY important when you are swopping lenses - if you change from one zoom to another and the rings work in opposite ways then it does lead to missed photographs.
I know that this is something which may not be important to non-Pros but believe me when you are under pressure on a job it is.
This consistancy is one reason that most Pros buy lenses made by the camera manufacturer and stick with them - it matters even in these days of AF.

CDS,
Thanks for the first look at the 2 lenses side by side, so to speak. I was wondering if you were ever gonna get that lens! :D I might add the 70-200 to bridge a gap in my current array of lenses, after some time. It is also possibly a lighterweight alternative to the 120-300 if I don't need it all the way out to 300. Please don't mistake me, I really like the 120-300! Only problem is that it weighs 5 3/4 pounds!

PaulB,
I really never paid too much attention, but having mentioned it, the Canon 16-35L and Sigma 120-300 EX zoom opposite directions. That really sux and I have problems with right/left and clockwise/anticlockwise. Something that is rather amusing here, is that I have no clue which direction I'm going in terms of north, south. east, and west of you asked me on the fly. If I was in the US, I'm usually not too far off. These roads turn a lot over here so it gets really confusing real quick. One thing I have foud is to listen for the click type sound and that means that you're at the end of the zoom range on either low, or high side. If you have a put/pull, listen for a similar noise. The Canon 75-200 FD lens I have is a push/pull type.

[IanD]

CDS,
Great shots, all of them.
Are they straight up or did they pass through PS?
The only problem for me looking at them is they make me want to go out and shoot. Problem is that right now the thermometer is at -10C with a wind out of the west.
Supposed to snow tomorrow. I think I'm going to move into Toms house and live in his garage with Gitzo :)
Ian

[davege]

I'm going to say that #2 is the Sigma and the rest are the Canon. That's because I detect a small amount of blur in the pavement/background of #2. I'm assuming that the Canon IS stabilized the others.

Please tell me I'm wrong! =8>

Great review and a good use of this forum.

davege

[CyberDyneSystems]

So far no one has ID'ed the lenses correctly.... :)

Althouh many have been "partly" correct,. no one hads nailed it.

[IanD]

Hey CDS
What is the prize if we guess it correct????
Ya going to award the lens you decide not to keep?????
:)
This should wake Tom up...lol
Ian

[CyberDyneSystems]

IanD wrote:
Hey CDS
What is the prize if we guess it correct????
Ya going to award the lens you decide not to keep?????
:)
This should wake Tom up...lol
Ian


The prize?

A date with "Gitzo"! :D

[Belmondo]

CyberDyneSystems wrote:The prize?

A date with "Gitzo"! :D



That woke up Tom! :D

[Wickedfn4u]

Funny I never looked at the way the zoom went. My Sig 70-200 2.8 and my Tamaron 28-75 2.8 both go the same way, but my 28-135 canon in the other direction.

I cannot even make a guess, and because I got the sigma, that makes me very happy.

TC

[Belmondo]

Okay.

#'s 1,2,& 4, Sigma

#3 Canon.

[msnow]

the suspense is killing me.

[defordphoto]

Since the images are totally different pictures with totally different lighting there is no way to call this a fair comparison, though I know CDS knows that. All we can do is make this a fun guessing game at best, so yeah I'll bite:

#1&4 Sigma
#2&3 Canon

Did anyone guess that already?

Anyway, when the photos are this different all one can do is guess.

[CyberDyneSystems]

lol,..

RFM has it exactly......



...BACKWARDS!

1&4 Canon
2&3 Sigma :)

Anyway,. the point being there was no obvious way to tell,. and neither lens "sucks" :D

[Belmondo]

Not bad! I got one out of four right.

That's a lot better than Jim.

[CyberDyneSystems]

belmondo wrote:
Not bad! I got one out of four right.

That's a lot better than Jim.
ROFLMAO!

'kay,. here's the 100% crop shots..


Sigma
http://images.fotopic.net/?id=2198122&outx=980&oq=0&noresize=1&nostamp=1

Canon
http://images.fotopic.net/?id=2198123&outx=980&oq=0&noresize=1&nostamp=1

[defordphoto]

HAH! Funny thing is that I picked the lesser sharper looking ones with the other hints you were dropping about the lighting and such and thought you might try posting lesser sharper photos for the Canon to get us to guess wrong. Guess I guessed wrong, wrong eh? I tried outguessing you and got outfoxed.

Too funny...

[Belmondo]

All that aside, they're all really good pictures. When we lived in the Bay Area, we had a stream running through our property, and every year we'd get a nesting pair of Mallards. Actually, they were all over the place. I haven't seen any down here in the desert, although they're supposed to be here. Even the females are colorful, in a drab sort of way.

Thos.

[Canuck]

belmondo wrote:
I haven't seen any down here in the desert, although they're supposed to be here. Even the females are colorful, in a drab sort of way.

Thos.

Tom,
That is what they call oxymoron, a self contradicting statement, much like mobile home, military intelligence, and others. I guess you could say that the desert itself is colourful in a drab way, being what you said. I thought it was plain drab, in a reddish-brown way. Although, the colour of red prickly pear in summer made for some interesting colour. I missed the lush green and season changes I was used to having been from the Northeast and of course proper winters. It truly amazed me that the first Christmas in Tucson was short and tshirt weather. Where's the 3+ feet of snow? It to me just didn't feel like Christmas, although the calendar said otherwise.

[defordphoto]

belmondo wrote:
All that aside, they're all really good pictures.

That's the bottom line. They are all great shots with two great lenses. To really pick between two lenses you need to shoot a detailed, static object under the same lighting conditions. They usually select buildings.

Nevertheless, since no one could give a definitive guess, that either shows the lenses are really pretty close or we just don't know &^%*! Heck, maybe both.

[Belmondo]

Our weather is very similar to Tucson, although we are typically a couple degrees warmer on average. I generally wear shorts year-round---the rare exception being if we're going to be outside after dark. Then it's a little too cool to be flashing around my fish-belly white legs. Besides my suits and slacks, I really only own one pair of casual long pants. There's just no occasion to wear them except for the situation I described.
Today, it was cloudy and overcast most of the day, but it still almost reached 70F. Not a bad deal.

Tom

[IanD]

belmondo wrote:

Today, it was cloudy and overcast most of the day, but it still almost reached 70F. Not a bad deal.
Tom

Geez,
Today will be -13C with a wind chill factor of -18C. 2-5cm of snow changing to freezing rain tonight. 2-4mm freezing rain expected. The sad part is the cold weather has not even startred :(
Can always take images of me freezing my Gitzo off....
Ian

[iwatkins]

Totally OT, but what is this Gitzo gag running all about ?

CDS, nice to see the comparison, makes me feel even better in my choice (OK, my wallets choice) to stick to Sigma EX lenses. :)

Cheers

Ian

[IanD]

Ian,
Gitzo is a figment of Toms mind. He believes (and we let him do so) that he owns a small beast of burden in the form of a 3 legged donkey. How the poor beast came to have only 3 legs is a soul searching question only Tom can answer. Tom, being the kind person he is, occasionally offers to led the beast to folks who have recently aquired a new long lens eg: Sigma 100-300 f4 or 50-500 that normally require a lens trailer to drag around.
Living out in the desert can do these things to you so we humor him.
3 legs...tripod...Gitzo.
I wanted to call him Manfrotto but since he belongs to Tom and he is only on loan to me, Gitzo it is.
Ian
:)

[iwatkins]

Thanks Ian.

LOL, Gitzo the three legged donkey. I like that. :D

Actually, I had to lug the Sigma 50-500 up a few hills over the holidays so a Gitzo would have come in handy. :)

Cheers

Ian

[Belmondo]

IanD wrote:How the poor beast came to have only 3 legs is a soul searching question only Tom can answer. Ian
:)


Actually, it's not a great mystery. Gitzo used to bite his nails, and one day, he just got carried away.

Actually, Gitzo (the three-legged donkey) is a collaborative figment of IanD's imagination and my own. We've each contributed elements to the ever-evolving legend, although Ian's thought processes clearly run more to the abstract than my own. I suspect there's something in that Canadian water.

Tom

[CyberDyneSystems]

IanD wrote:

I wanted to call him Manfrotto..........
:)



OH MY GOD! ROFLMAO!!!!!!!

Why is that SOOOO funny! :D

[IanD]

belmondo wrote:
IanD wrote:How the poor beast came to have only 3 legs is a soul searching question only Tom can answer. Ian
:)


Actually, it's not a great mystery. Gitzo used to bite his nails, and one day, he just got carried away.



Tom
Thank God he was not licking his....oh forget it...family post here :)
Ian

[Belmondo]

Gasp!!!

:O :O Boy, are my two faces red! (one for each chin)

[defordphoto]

Boy oh boy did this thread go falling rapidly off the cliff. Whew! :)

[IanD]

THUMP!
Sound of thread landing at bottom of cliff...end of thread.

[KennyG]

I'll throw a couple of things in here for you to contemplate. I own both lenses (well my wife now has the Sigma for her 300D) and have had a long experience of both.

The Canon is built as a sealed lens and despite your initial views it is really a much higher build quality. The extra weight is down to better quality and heavier glass. I know I'd rather have better glass than less weight.

You did not mention the distance switch which saves time if you do not plan to close focus.

The AF is way, way faster than the Sigma, and even faster again if you set the distance switch. As I have used both for so long I know the difference. The Canon just snaps onto focus where the Sigma whines onto it.

The Sigma suffers from flare, the Canon is pretty much immune.

The Canon is sharper corner-to-corner than the Sigma and has better contrast. You will see this yourself as you take more shots.

The direction of the focus ring is important. All my lenses have the ring in the same direction. I suppose it could depend on how you use your system, but for action work like mine, with a couple of cameras where you drop one (not literally, let the neck strap hold it) to pick up another, you can't live with the difference.

The smoother Canon collar is important if you use the collar to go from landscape to portrait. Mine never leaves the lens and if I do use a tripod, it has a QR plate attached anyway.

The IS is excellent. It is far better than the IS on the 28-135 or 75-300 and can give you some of those shots hand-held that you would fluff without it.

The Sigma lens hood is one of the contributary factors to the flare issue. Personally I hate the sandpaper feel/look.

The carry cases they come in are not important as 99% of owners only use them for storage at home or the studio. The rest of the time the camera lives in a bag along with the camera(s).

I have tested both of these lenses in the field using my 1D and 10D and in my opinion the Canon is a clear winner for me. I don't throw money at my camera system, everything has to earn its way and the Canon does just that for me.

That isn't to say the Sigma isn't a good lens, it is very good, but it is not in the same league as the Canon. It is one of Sigma's top three lenses and worth every cent. I just couldn't live with it day to day.

I am sure you will identify the differences as you get to use the Canon more.

[eos10dmacosx]

lol,..

RFM has it exactly......



...BACKWARDS!

1&4 Canon
2&3 Sigma :)

Anyway,. the point being there was no obvious way to tell,. and neither lens "sucks" :D

And for all those that had a go -- CDS named his images: 1.Mallard_6942c; 2.Mallard_700s; 3.Mallard_69994s; Mallard_6934c.

I guess the c stands for Canon, and the s for Sigma? LOL

[nosquare2003]

Any comparison after using 1.4TC or 2.0 TC?

[nosquare2003]

You did not mention the distance switch which saves time if you do not plan to close focus.

The AF is way, way faster than the Sigma, and even faster again if you set the distance switch. As I have used both for so long I know the difference. The Canon just snaps onto focus where the Sigma whines onto it.


Do your above comments on AF speed based on 1D or 10D? Thanks.

[CyberDyneSystems]

I will need to update this as I get more familiar with the new lens! :)

My tests were made on a 10D, center focus point only.

The oversite of the focus limit switch is glaring... indeed I need to ammend that error,. as yet I have not used it, so I can not comment on it's effect on focus speed,. but I am sure it will help.

I have done a focus speed test,.. again not measured by anything other than my own perception,. but I am confident that the Canon does focus faster, even with IS on,. but IS does slow down the intial focus from a "stand still" as the IS needs to spin up...

With AI servo on and moving the changing the focus from differing objects at differing distances,.. the Canon foucs responds faster,. but the Sigma is no slouch. The Canon is noticeably quieter (like all USM Vs. Sigma HSM)

KennyG,. your comment that the Canon's extra weight = better construction is ironic in that in most cases when two like lenses of Canon and Sigma are compared the Sigma is usually a heavy beast and people often point that out... does this mean that the Sigma's in those cases are better build quality? :wink:

re: Weight,. the difference in weight has been the most significant issue for me with the Canon lens... I am surprised to admit this,.

My "main lens" for some time has been either my current 500mm f/4.5 prime or the Sigma 50-500mm zoom. Both obviously very heavy lenses that I am not at all concerned about the weight of.... it is simply a matter of how one shoots with the lens.

That said, when I use a "normal" lens that does not require a trailer to carry :) I have a completely different style of using the lens.. specifically when shooting hand held.

With the Sigma's light weight and ergonomics it was a joy to shoot hand held,. with the Canon it is nearly as heavy as that beastly 50-500mm... a lens I would never DREAm of using without at least a monopod to carry the weight..

I am sure I will grow used to the Canon's different ergonomics.. but I am not at al sure I will ever consider it comfortable to shoot hand held with it's incredible "heaviness"

This too is ironic given that the advantage of the IS (and it's associated $700.00 premium on the price tag) is in hand held shooting :(

[CyberDyneSystems]

lol,..

RFM has it exactly......



...BACKWARDS!

1&4 Canon
2&3 Sigma :)

Anyway,. the point being there was no obvious way to tell,. and neither lens "sucks" :D

And for all those that had a go -- CDS named his images: 1.Mallard_6942c; 2.Mallard_700s; 3.Mallard_69994s; Mallard_6934c.

I guess the c stands for Canon, and the s for Sigma? LOL

:D he he,.. I forgot about that,. funny no one else spotted it :)

[CyberDyneSystems]

Any comparison after using 1.4TC or 2.0 TC?

Presently I only own the two Sigma TCs... so I can not really do a test on this. I know the Sigma70-200 looks near perfect with the 1.4X TC,. with the 2X it functions perfectly but the image quality does decline noticeably,. still it is a very usable solution.

The Canon lens DOES work fine with both Sigma TCs as well,. (in fact it works with BOTH at the same time :D,. as does the Sigma lens)

But to date I have not had a chance to really look at the image quality.

[nosquare2003]

Thanks CDS for your comments. Unlike you, I don't have anything long (boys and girls, please don't laugh). In fact, I'm making a plan to buy a lens up to 200mm/f2.8. Maybe a prime or a zoom. I think that I can play that thing (with tc) for many years as I only need a long lens ocassionally.

Regarding autofocus speed, I believe that the EF lens will be much faster than 10D if a 1D is used. Anyway, I don't have a 1D and so it doesn't matter to me.

BTW, you really show the quality of the EX lens. Thanks again.

[hotled]

Just some thoughts here. Take into the fact that you are comparing a $1,600.00 lens to a $759.00 lens.

So for the money which is the better buy? Seems like the Quality of the shots are equal, so you pay 800.00 more for the IS and for faster focusing?

Not bashing at all here, we all appreciate the effort it takes to review things. I just think you should compare the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 to a lens of equivilent retail price.

[LightRules]

The Sigma can hold its own against any of Canon's 70-200s. Even though I recently went from the EX to the L-IS, it wasn't for optical reasons per se. With any TCs attached, the L-IS is better, at least against CA, but optically they are very close. See this at my site, for example:

http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/70200s

[CyberDyneSystems]

Hotled,. I'm confused... by your post.

I say that a $750.00 lens compares very favorably with one costing more than double.... the Sigma is clearly the bargain of the two.


Why on earth wouldn't I want to share the fact that one can get 9/10ths the functionality and quality of the Canon at about 1/3rd the price?


Thats said.... this "1st impression" review was written a looooong time ago.
With more use I do see more of the advatages of the Canon. AF speed and particualrly AF tracking are far more noticeably faster on a faster Camera. The test was done on a 10D.. which was not the fastest AFing camera on the block. I now use a 1D MkII and a 20D and with both the speed increase is dramatic.

Also.. shots wide open in low light are in fact noticeably improved on the Canon.. (IS plays no small part in my number of keepers to be sure)

I still highly recomend the Sigma for anyone who needs a fast f/2.8 zoom in this range and has a tight budget. It is a very good bargain and a great lens period.

But for the pro or high end enthusiast with the ability to afford the Canon.. you certainly can not go wromg.

It's still Damn heavy though ;)

[condyk]

Really enjoyed this perfectly objective and informative review and the various user views that followed ... even the irrelevant ones! I'd started to think you'd caught L disease CDS, i.e. an irrational feeling that anything with a red ring (missus!!) was implicitely better in every single way than anything else on the market, irrespective of ANY criteria one may apply, but glad to see it's not the case.

IS v's non IS ... dunno if it's fair but it is VERY useful as I guess many wonder is the upgrade worth it. Throws Cat amongst Pigeons for prospective 70-200mm f4 owners perhaps. Shows the Sigma in a great light.

All you say about general handling is SO relevant and often ignored. I have started MF with my 100-300mm f4 a lot because it is just so easy and I feel I get a tiny tad of extra focus in the final shots. If the focus ring was less easy to locate and use then I wouldn't bother and some shots would maybe suffer for it.

[martook]

ROFLMAO!

Something tells me someone did a search and failed to realise that the thread was rather old... but hell, that's great! Never would have read it otherwise, and the rant about Gitzo was bloody hilarious! :D

[electra]

i sort of guessed the images right. the 1&4 both have very nice sharp colors. this can easily be fixed by saturation controls. but then again, maybe the lighting wasn't quite right when 2&3 were photographed.

my two cents

...

[lostdoggy]

1, 3 & 4 is Canon and 2 is Sigma

[Florida Cracker]

First three taken with the Sigma , Last taken with the Canon ?

[Keiffer]

My guess is
1- Sigma
2- Canon
3&4 Sigma

[davidfig]

Here are my guess's.

#2 is definently Canon. I think #1 and #4 are Sigma. As for #3, the signs I look for do not help me.

How did I guess! Maybe this well help me understand Bokeh. I would appreciate comments on this as I am trying to understand why one would spend three times the money for the 24-70L. I have looked at other pictures on the net. When a sort of bright point is out of focus. The sigma seems to have an uneven brightness. The Canon seems to more evenly spread the brightness across the unfocused part. In other words the Sigma looks more like a ring and the Canon looks like an evenly filled circle.

Ok, now what how far off is my guess?

[martook]

Hey guys, let's have a reality check here and see what happens... the thread was started at 2004-01-01. The correct answers are on page two. How abouty reading a thread before posting? :D

[Keiffer]

Sorry Martook, all that Evelyn Wood speed reading in the past has caught up to me. LOL Thanks for pointing that out.(Not that I checked to see if your right or anythingLOL)

[LightRules]

Interesting find today. My copy of the 70-200IS is sharper at 200mm than at 70mm wide open, while 2 peers of mine and their copies are the exact opposite: sharper at 70mm than at 200mm wide open. I'd be curious to hear those in this forum who have the 70-200IS how their copy fares with this variation in focal length wide open.

[Canuck]

I will need to update this as I get more familiar with the new lens! :)

My tests were made on a 10D, center focus point only.

The oversite of the focus limit switch is glaring... indeed I need to ammend that error,. as yet I have not used it, so I can not comment on it's effect on focus speed,. but I am sure it will help.

I have done a focus speed test,.. again not measured by anything other than my own perception,. but I am confident that the Canon does focus faster, even with IS on,. but IS does slow down the intial focus from a "stand still" as the IS needs to spin up...

With AI servo on and moving the changing the focus from differing objects at differing distances,.. the Canon foucs responds faster,. but the Sigma is no slouch. The Canon is noticeably quieter (like all USM Vs. Sigma HSM)

KennyG,. your comment that the Canon's extra weight = better construction is ironic in that in most cases when two like lenses of Canon and Sigma are compared the Sigma is usually a heavy beast and people often point that out... does this mean that the Sigma's in those cases are better build quality? :wink:

re: Weight,. the difference in weight has been the most significant issue for me with the Canon lens... I am surprised to admit this,.

My "main lens" for some time has been either my current 500mm f/4.5 prime or the Sigma 50-500mm zoom. Both obviously very heavy lenses that I am not at all concerned about the weight of.... it is simply a matter of how one shoots with the lens.

That said, when I use a "normal" lens that does not require a trailer to carry :) I have a completely different style of using the lens.. specifically when shooting hand held.

With the Sigma's light weight and ergonomics it was a joy to shoot hand held,. with the Canon it is nearly as heavy as that beastly 50-500mm... a lens I would never DREAm of using without at least a monopod to carry the weight..

I am sure I will grow used to the Canon's different ergonomics.. but I am not at al sure I will ever consider it comfortable to shoot hand held with it's incredible "heaviness"

This too is ironic given that the advantage of the IS (and it's associated $700.00 premium on the price tag) is in hand held shooting :(

Well, in my travels, I am finding that the 120-300 is overkill in some instances and the fact that it weighs 5 3/4 lbs is fine, but the need to get an IS lens is there. I know we talked ad nauseum regarding this and the nod now goes definitely to the Canon L IS as the IS can be invaluable in the waning light I am often shooting in as in sunsets and suchlike. Example: Out on "safari"..sorta... was out at a reindeer farm about an hour from here and the 24-70 wasn't quite enough but the 120-300 woulda been overkill, so it stands to reason that somewhere in the lower end of the 120-300 woulda been the right focal length; the shutter speed needed is a lot easier to do when you have a few more fstops to play w/, and it would allow me to keep the 1.4xtc on the monster w/o any problems. Now...to get the money together to buy it.

[tinpusher]

I know this thread is old but I have a question. There was mention of the Sigma being a better value because it was $800 cheaper. Is the non-IS Canon lens not a better comparison to the Sigma? If so then the cost is very similar.

[Curtis N]

Well thanks for digging this up, Tinpusher! These two lenses get talked about a lot, but rarely do we see such a comprehensive comparison. I had not seen this review before. It might be worth mentioning that Sigma introduced the DG version (claims to have an additional coating to counteract problems from light reflecting back from digital sensors) since CDS' review was written.

I found this excerpt especially interesting:Please Note: A few months back I reported some odd AF accuracy problems with the Sigma that seemd to crop up out of no where. Upon further investigation,. I realized that all isuues disapeared when the UV filter I was using was removed. Since then no problems at all. For this reason both lenses I am using in the field with no filterI have had focus issues with the Sigma as well, and now I'm wondering if they were caused by the UV filter. I guess I now have one more reason NOT to use one. ;)

[CyberDyneSystems]

Tinpusher,. I compared the two lenses I had,. fairness did not enter into it. Also at the time,. there was still a pretty big difference in the prices of the Non is lenses compared,. since then the Sigma has gone up.. a lot.

Curtis,. since the UV filter discovery I heard a number of similar tales and have experienced it again myself with another lens.

Sometimes UV filters are the devil.. so anytime you have issues one must remember to eliminate all possible outside influences,. and the filter we often forget.

Lastly,. with more use I have grown to appreciate the Canon's IQ quite a bit.. it's the most "prime like" zoom I have owned with the possible exception of the Sigma 300-800mm

[Hossam]

thanx for this very useful and needed comparison

[JaGWiRE]

I figured I'd bump this and love to know if anybody has compared the DG version.
I want to upgrade my 70-200 f/4L lens. My next lens is probably going tob e a 135L as it stands, and I have been thinking of a 70-200 2.8. The DG version is less then $800 USD at sigma4less. I used it a while back, it was pretty pleasent an experience, and looked a heck of a lot nicer then the old version.

[BULLER]

IQ wise - I see the Canon as winner:

Have a look here - 200mm comparison (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=376&Camera=9&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=103&CameraComp=9&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0)

[caiguar]

wow according to that test the sigma is crap. I don't think its that big of a gap between the two as that test suggests but that's just me. I used the canon because a friend has it and I have to admit, it does look good but, the gap between the two is not that big, only in price. mine is the APO, I don't know if that makes a diference

[wcl4]

Looks like camera shake on the Sigma test.

[4walls]

CyberDyne... still using the Sigma? I am looking at this lens and wondered how you like it after all this time.

[JPM Photography]

excellent images. I am looking forward to saving up enough money to buy the Sigma.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Missed the question from last April, but I had long since sold the SIGMA so I can;t say regarding "after all thsi time"

RE: the "DG" version, I think they are the same IMHO.

[05Xrunner]

the digital picture seems to be more of a Canon or nothing type reviewer

[ncognet0]

So in a nutshell do you recomend the sigma, I want a 70-200 but just cant afford the canon. Ive even looked at the tamron. The more I read the more confused I get.

[TheObiJuan]

I used to shoot with the 70-200 f/2.8L (non-IS) and now I have a Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 and I see no discernible difference.
I do not pixel peep really and never shoot cards and useless sh!t around the house just to make my gear feel useful.
I shoot outdoors and things that count, and there, the difference is negligible.