Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX HSM

[AJ Montgomery]

Anyone here care to share their experienced opinions of this lense? I am considering this and the Canon EF 17-40 F/4L USM to go with my new 20D.
I typically shoot landscape and mid distance subjects. I am really curious as to the focal performance of the Sigma at F/2.8 and wide open. I will likely look into a 1.4X to compliment for greater distance.

[shaun3000]

Seems like I saw a thread about the Sigma here recently... I couldn't find it though. Oh well.

From what I've heard the Sigma is very close optically to Canon's offerings but still outshined by Canon. The focusing is also slower. It uses Sigma's HSM which is their version of USM. It's slower and a little noisier. It's also not weather sealed, which I believe Canon's f/2.8 is. (Maybe not, I think just the IS version is sealed) BUT, from what I've heard, the huge price difference between the Sigma and Canon's f/2.8 lenses (over $500) more than makes up for the slightly inferior performance.

[tim]

There's a really good article around comparing this lens to the Canon F2.8 and F4 lenses. I'm sorry I don't have time to search for it for you right now, but if you search for the lens name here on POTN you should find a link to it quite easily.

[Mogwyth]

I have used them both if you can live without the f2.8 get the Canon, it's slightly better. If you are shooting Landscape/static objects then as long as you have a decent tripod not having f/2.8 or using f/5.6 with the 1.4 is not giong to make that much difference IMHO. If you need lower light capibility then the Sigma is not to be sniffed at given the price.

[davidwegs]

I have the Canon 2.8 and it is better (slightly) than the Sigma. I got a Sigma for the black body as I hate Canons white body. The one I got I returned as it rear focussed on the 20d. After using it in many situations I found it to be consistently (albiet very slightly) rear focussing. I know others have had better results from the Sigma, I've seen some.

I will say this: the Sigma (if it hits it's focus point correctly) is as sharp as the Canon wide open. The color rendition is slightly yellow. The focus speed is slower if you are following race cars, but not for people (I found the speed it focusses at to be just about comparable).

[AJ Montgomery]

Thanks for the input. I have chosen to go with the Canon EF 70-200 F/4L USM as I feel that it's performance at F/4 along with the 20d's higher ISO capability will be sufficient. I also feel the Canon L glass will hold it's value better and I hope to resell it when I can afford the EF 70-200 F/2.8L IS USM.

[shaun3000]

Great choice. I have the f/4L and love it.

[lippy113]

I GOT THE SIGMA 70-200 EX HSM (NON DG VERSION)AND I LOVE ITS PERFORMANCE

[Lani Kai]

Mine was slightly soft near MFD at 200mm, but aside from that the images were very sharp wide open.

[Honeybee]

I have the newer EX DG HSM version and it's very sharp. Currently, the Canon being slightly better wasn't good enough for me to spend the extra $$$. Wish Canon offered a black version of the 70-200.

Just my $0.02, but I'd never pass up 2.8 for f/4 - but that's what makes life so grand, freedom of choice.

Enjoy your lens.