Canon vs. Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 Likes vs. dislikes

[thunt]

I am a firm believer in research, research, research, so I am trying to find cause to spend $1000 for the Canon, as opposed to $550 for the Sigma. So lets hear from you. Which one of these do you shoot, preferably people who have shot both, and how did you like it? Sharpness, contrast, color, DOF. I currently shoot on a D30, and Elan 7. D30 will soon go on auction block to fund 10D.

How good is the HSM compared to the USM? What is the quality of the glass in the EX APO IF ?

Specs that I could dig up on the web are below:

Lens
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L USM
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX APO IF HSM

Focus Drive
Canon USM
Sigma HSM

Groups/Elements
Canon 15/18
Sigma 14/17

Minimum Aperture
Canon 32
Sigma 32

Closest Focusing Distance
Canon 1.5 Meters / 4.9 ft.
Sigma 6 ft

Filter Size
Canon 77
Sigma 77

Length (Inches)
Canon 7.6"
Sigma 7.1"

Weight
Canon 2.88 lbs.
Sigma 3.06 lbs.

Thanks,
Troy

[photography By Evangelos]

Well if you get a good sigma you are in luck. I have had 2 Sigmas in the last 3 years and they have been lemons. First off sigmas HSM moter is not at all as quiet as the canon USM at all. Then there is the over all quality of a sigma lens not at all that good. Thats is why I said if you get a good one you are in luck. As it can be hit or miss with a sigma lens it terms of quality. I had the 17-35 HSM F2.8 and the 50MM macro. The 17-35 Sigma's HSM moter broke only after 9 months of srvice. I sent in the lens in 4 times to sigma. And then I sold it off. There is no value in somthing that you keep having to repaird when you need to use it and you are with out a lens. As they say time is money. Then I got the 50mm macro. More problems the aperture kept sticking at F11 all the time and 6 more times in to sigma and then I sold it off. Every time I use a lens I never want to worry will it work today. I have replaced the Sigma 17-35 with the canon 17-35 F2.8 L lens and it works flawlessly over the sigma. And the 50MM sigma macro was replaced with the canon 50mm Macro also no problems. I have never had any problems with any of my canon "L" glass or of my standard EOS lenses. If you can get your hands on a used canon 80-200 F2.8 L used it will be a better lens. It is a older canon lens but its still a canon "L" lens. I have one of these and I love it I got is used from B&H in New York it was in like new condition and I paid what you would pay for a new sigma lens. I also have the new 70-200 F2.8 L IS lens and still think that the older canon 80-200 F2.8 L is a sharper lens. Good luck and I hope this helps you in your decision process. Have a great day.

[Me an Mo]

I have had four Sigma lenses and all have been good, just lucky I guess. Try one on loan. I like em!

[Sporto]

Personally, I have the Sigma - not that quite. If you have the money (which I did not) go with the Canon. I have Canon, Tamron, and Sigma lenses and the Canon is much more crisp, quiter and faster than the others.

Sporto

[photography By Evangelos]

Sigma VS canon they are not at all equals in quality or performance at all. Fact just go to a major sporting event and see how many sigmas are in used by pros working for papers or magazines. None at all why? They can not afford for them to break when they need them to work as it can cause them to miss that all important shot. Sigma is not as good as canon EF glass or canon "L" glass. Do not tell your self the lie that sigma is a good. It's priced to save money and that is it. I have had too many problems with sigma lenses in the past and stay away from them. I can not have a lens break on me when I am at a wedding or an event. This has happend twice with sigmas and will not happen again. I have canon lenses only and my life is simple and care free with no SIGMA worries at all.