ok the 70-200mm debate

[c0ntr0lz]

ok after the horse show yesterday i know i need to get something with f2.8
now everyone knows of the Canon L glass and oh well it's liked and loved and loathed after and i don't think i'd have an large issue of spening a 1,000 bux on it.
But can someone show me examples of it compared to the
Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 and the Canon 70-200mm 2.8
I've seen the Canon post and it's a great lens
but i'd like to see the same scene taken with both lens
altho i bet there's not a lot of people that would buy both
thanks in advance

[roanjohn]

This is how I see it:

If you get the SIgma - you'll be thinking about the Canon.

If you get the Canon - you won't be thinking about the Sigma ;-)

I don't own the Canon 70-200 f2.8..........but I own the f4 version. And that lens is just AMAZING!!!

So clear your mind............get the most bang for your buck...........go for Canon L.


Ro1

[Jmurman]

I bought the Sigma 20-200 2.8 after a lot of internal debate. I dont regret it per se, but I dont get a chance to use the lense very much. I use me Tamron 28-75 2.8 almost exclusively.

My next lense will be a Canon L of some sort...

[c0ntr0lz]

roanjohn i know it's the same old story is the grass greener :D


I bought the Sigma 20-200 2.8 after a lot of internal debate. I dont regret it per se, but I dont get a chance to use the lense very much. I use me Tamron 28-75 2.8 almost exclusively.

My next lense will be a Canon L of some sort...

Jmurman how do you like the 28-75mm?

and for CyberDyne i saw you're post
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=102&sort=7&thecat=29

and was wondering how you like the lens now?

[DaveG]

ok after the horse show yesterday i know i need to get something with f2.8
now everyone knows of the Canon L glass and oh well it's liked and loved and loathed after and i don't think i'd have an large issue of spening a 1,000 bux on it.
But can someone show me examples of it compared to the
Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 and the Canon 70-200mm 2.8
I've seen the Canon post and it's a great lens
but i'd like to see the same scene taken with both lens
altho i bet there's not a lot of people that would buy both
thanks in advance

i thnk tht u shod by whtevr lns u thnk u cn aford. anoyng aint it.

[roanjohn]

i thnk tht u shod by whtevr lns u thnk u cn aford. anoyng aint it.

WOW!!! I feel like were texting on our cellular :-)

Also, dnt frget the rsale valu of d canon lns.

RO1

[Jmurman]

roanjohn i know it's the same old story is the grass greener :D


I bought the Sigma 20-200 2.8 after a lot of internal debate. I dont regret it per se, but I dont get a chance to use the lense very much. I use me Tamron 28-75 2.8 almost exclusively.

My next lense will be a Canon L of some sort...

Jmurman how do you like the 28-75mm?

and for CyberDyne i saw you're post
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=102&sort=7&thecat=29

and was wondering how you like the lens now?

I really love the Tamron. It is a perfect walk around lense for me. The Sigma is pretty heavy so a day with it is a bit much. Now in all fairness, I should asy that my bag isnt the best and will not hold the Sig, so I will be swayed to start carrying it around more with a better bag.

[Haifidelity]

I hate to say it, but Jmurman is right about "thinking about the L".

That being said, i've seen EXCELLENT images made with the Sigma, equally on par with my 70-200 f/2.8L. However, from the accounts i've heard, the HSM motor on the Sigma is not quite as fast as the Ring-Type USM on the 2.8L. Hopefully somebody can post otherwise.

[Tom W]

roanjohn i know it's the same old story is the grass greener :D


I bought the Sigma 20-200 2.8 after a lot of internal debate. I dont regret it per se, but I dont get a chance to use the lense very much. I use me Tamron 28-75 2.8 almost exclusively.

My next lense will be a Canon L of some sort...

Jmurman how do you like the 28-75mm?

and for CyberDyne i saw you're post
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=102&sort=7&thecat=29

and was wondering how you like the lens now?

I guess I can speak for CyberDyne on this lens, since I bought it from him about 3 months ago. It is a very very good lens. Its pretty-much everything that he says it is in his report on FM.com. Its sharp down to f/2.8, and extremely sharp above that. It works well with the 1.4X teleconverter. It is said to be lighter than the Canon 70-200/2.8.

The focusing issue he described has since been traced to the inexpensive UV filter that was being used - it had a silver-colored ring and poor coating, making it a bit too reflective and creating confusing contrast sources for the auto focus scheme. With a good Hoya HMC or no filter at all, the lens focuses very reliably. I have the filter now, and will only use it for shipping protection, just has he did when the lens was shipped to me.

CDS can give you a direct comparison to the Canon version that he has now, but I will say that the images I get from it are tack sharp and contrasty. The images are very slightly warm in color compared to my 100-400L, but the difference is very tiny. Its certainly not enough to make me change lenses at this point.

[GenEOS]

If you buy the Sigma and like it and it serves your photography, well, then it's a good deal. If you don't like it, and want to sell it, you are going to loose a lot of money, because the resale-ability stinks.

If you get the 70-200 IS f2.8, and you don't like it...You will be able to re-sell it for almost what you paid for it, with no problems.

The Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS is a must have Canon lens. If you can afford it...Buy It. It is going to serve you well.

[Tom W]

If you buy the Sigma and like it and it serves your photography, well, then it's a good deal. If you don't like it, and want to sell it, you are going to loose a lot of money, because the resale-ability stinks.

If you get the 70-200 IS f2.8, and you don't like it...You will be able to re-sell it for almost what you paid for it, with no problems.

The Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS is a must have Canon lens. If you can afford it...Buy It. It is going to serve you well.

Actually, the 70-200 f/2.8 EX HSM Sigma lens holds its value quite well. Perhaps not quite as well as the Canon, but it is a sturdy, well-made lens. There's no reason for it to lose value quickly. That is not true of all Sigma lenses, but certain ones are more coveted than others. This is one of those.

[Malaxos1]

I had the same delema when I bought my Canon 70-200 F4L. It is roughly the same price as the Sigma, and the f2.8 would have been nice. But I found that the sweet spot is 5.6-8. So I figured that if I can't get sharp photos at f2.8 or 4 then I would get the Canon. Finally I checked out photos on www.photosig.com and searched photos by lens. There I was able to really see the difference, the Canon was a lot better. I would go there and check it out...Dean

[CyberDyneSystems]

As stated.. the Sigma holds it's value very well.. I've seen them seel on E-bay USED for more than some places sell them new.. .. not to mention that on this forum or FM forum they sell for maybe $100.00-$150.00 less than new...

The biggest difference between the two lenses in my humble opinion are;

1. IS.. the $1,600.00 Canon version has IS and it is pretty swell!

2. AF.. at first I was unimpressed with the comparison between the Canon and the Sigma.. the Canon is faster.. but it did not seem to be a LOT faster... That was testing against static objects.. Where the Canon lens excels is in real world fast moving objects.. the Canon AF system will really shine with the Canon lens.

3. Weight.. the difference is substantial. the Canon being much heavier (this is the f/2.8 IS version I refer to) I used to enjoy the Sigma lens as a very usable handheld lens for long durations. Of course I still use the Canon hand held.. with the IS why not.. but it is so much heavier I usually use it on a monopod just to take the weight off of my neck and arms.

4. Consistancy,.. Assuming there is some truth to what we read on line.. :wink: there are clearly better Sigma's and worse ones.. My on,ly experiences with Sgma lenses have ALL been positive. I have had good copies in all cases and still use a Sigma as my primary lens. In fact, Ironically,. the only two peices of hardware that have ever failed for me have been of Canon Manufacture :roll: :wink:

[drisley]

I've read here that tests show the sigma 70-200mm F2.8 to be one stop slower than the 70-200mm F2.8L.
If that is the case you are definately better off getting the F4L lens.

[KennyG]

Like CDS I have both. Well, my wife has the Sigma these days. I'll try and get round to posting some tests when I get a spare half hour.

The faster AF of the Canon sets it apart when it comes to using it for action shots, as does the weatherproofing of my 2.8 IS when we get our standard northern British weather. I have never been all that impressed with the sandpaper feel of the Sigmas, or their ability to be used in adverse conditions.

I find the contrast of the Canon far superior. I also had issues with flare and some CA with the Sigma that I have not seen at all with the Canon. As a minor point, the Canon is quieter, which can be an advantage in some circumstances. The Sigma's motor reminds me of a dentists drill where you don't even hear the Canon.

Please don't take this as Sigma bashing, it isn't. I am just making comparisons from personal experience.

[Tom W]

Here's the Sigma at 200 mm, f/2.8, at 1/320 second. Its certainly produces a decent image wide open. I've used it without fear in a wedding (indoors without flash) and for some wildlife photography.

http://images.fotopic.net/?id=5528697&outx=600&noresize=1&nostamp=1

If I were shooting the kinds of situations that Kenny was shooting, I'd opt for the Canon. This is particularly true if I were making my living with the camera. But I'm not, and I haven't really shot too much fast action.

I guess all I'm saying is that if you need f/2.8 and don't have the money, the Sigma makes a darn good second-best 70-200 f/2.8 lens.

[CyberDyneSystems]

The timing of this thread is really funny...

Today I was out shooting with the MkII and the Canon 70-200mm IS.. I was shooting a Kestral in action.. when the Camera froze.. "error 01"... I switched it off cursing.. turned it back on.. this time it did not lock up.. but the AF was gone.. and I could not shoot.. the aperture was stated as "00" and it would not adjust.. then after mashing enough buttons I got "Error99"

A stuck aperure? This is a "Sigma" problem isn't it? :roll:

I dumped the 70-200mm and tossed on my 28-70mm and kept shooting..

This was the CANON lens.. only 5 months old... and lightly used.

Again.. I am keeping a smile in this situation only because I love irony :wink:

[CyberDyneSystems]

Tom.. that shot is SWEET!

[Tom W]

Here's another, this time with an actual humming bird in it!

http://images.fotopic.net/?id=5528855&outx=600&noresize=1&nostamp=1

This time, 175 mm, f/2.8 at 1/250 seconds. I watched that feeder for what seemed like hours for only one shot!

[c0ntr0lz]

thanks for all the info
Tom the last pic was great but the 1st is not really clear or i'm not looking at the right spot of focus.

CDS sorry to hear about you troubles and the CANON lens

i will still think about this till the day i buy one or the other
i'm really thinking of trying the Sigma
i did go over to wolf and tried it on a 300d not mine but one
and it felt really niceand moved very nice
the camera wasn't on so i didn't get to see it work

[defordphoto]

The timing of this thread is really funny...

Today I was out shooting with the MkII and the Canon 70-200mm IS.. I was shooting a Kestral in action.. when the Camera froze.. "error 01"... I switched it off cursing.. turned it back on.. this time it did not lock up.. but the AF was gone.. and I could not shoot.. the aperture was stated as "00" and it would not adjust.. then after mashing enough buttons I got "Error99"

A stuck aperure? This is a "Sigma" problem isn't it? :roll:

I dumped the 70-200mm and tossed on my 28-70mm and kept shooting..

This was the CANON lens.. only 5 months old... and lightly used.

Again.. I am keeping a smile in this situation only because I love irony :wink:

You might want to read this: http://www.robgalbraith.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=248404&page=0&view=collap sed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1#Post249422

I have not had any issues yet. Keeping my fingers crossed.

[c0ntr0lz]

quick ques
the 70-200 f2.8 is a slide zoom
and the f4 isn't?

[ijohnson]

The Canon 2.8 is not a slide zoom, not sure if you were asking about the Canon or the Sigma.

Personally, I love and adore my 2.8. It is sooooo beautiful. I am glad that I don't have a girlfriend right now, I would hate to have to make another spot in bed for her.

[c0ntr0lz]

sorry yeah i'm asking aobut the canon 2.8 and 4
if they are slide or not

[ijohnson]

So I think I answered that. Neither of them are slides.

[c0ntr0lz]

ok thats what i thought
kool

[jgbeam]

I was facing the same decision a couple of months ago so I went to a local dealer to see if they had the Canon for rent. They didn't but had the Sigma. I rented it for $25 for three days and got a good sense of its handling and image quality. My conclusion? Found out that I could live without either one for a while. I don't know whether I saved myself $1200 or $600, but at least I got rid of the urge...for a while.

Jim

[CyberDyneSystems]

The timing of this thread is really funny...

Today I was out shooting with the MkII and the Canon 70-200mm IS.. I was shooting a Kestral in action.. when the Camera froze.. "error 01"... I switched it off cursing.. turned it back on.. this time it did not lock up.. but the AF was gone.. and I could not shoot.. the aperture was stated as "00" and it would not adjust.. then after mashing enough buttons I got "Error99"

A stuck aperure? This is a "Sigma" problem isn't it? :roll:

I dumped the 70-200mm and tossed on my 28-70mm and kept shooting..

This was the CANON lens.. only 5 months old... and lightly used.

Again.. I am keeping a smile in this situation only because I love irony :wink:

You might want to read this: http://www.robgalbraith.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=248404&page=0&view=collap sed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1#Post249422

I have not had any issues yet. Keeping my fingers crossed.

Spot On RFM!

Whoa.. yes.. this is exactly the same issue.. Aperture at "00" .. I don't think I was in portrait.. so that looks like a red herring... (the battery idea, must be a different issue alltogether... one I would find hard to imagine given the snugness of the fit)

Well.. after some swapping.. I got the lens to work again.. if I put it back on the MkII it was still no go.. but I put it on the 10D and bingo.. all was well with the world... after taht I put it back on the MkII and of course everything waorked fine again...

So.. it is an intermittent problem associated with the lens itself. :(

I guess I'll wait for a second instance of the malfuntion.. (probably happen while dangling from the side of a cliff shooting nesting birds :roll: ) before I send it to Canon..