Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM

[kevinll]

Since the Sigma 70-200mm EX DG OS HSM is avaible at the stores, I'm starting this thread. I was wondering if anybody already have this lens in their gear list and like to share their (example) pics made by this lens :D

Kevin.

[arcticfoxchar]

got the lens but only a few quick snaps...nothing in the computer yet...on 50D screen looks sharp but then need to look at 100%crop...

hope to get more chance with it this weekend and post to this or the other thread.

but my first impressions is in the thread below... happy to finally get it...so far so good...now nothing to blame except user errors

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=10702074#post10702074

[kevinll]

That's nice :D And how is it perfoming at 200mm?

[rjx]

Since this thread is in the lens archive, it would be nice if people could add pics to this thread.

[CyberDyneSystems]

When someone has photos to share, then they are invited to start a thread like this here.

If you don't have it, and don't have pics, please don't start another empty discussion thread.

[placidbabe]

My lens arrived about an hour ago! I took a few shots and I'm pleased with it so far.
I don't have ducks, but I do have chickens : D
Shot with 450D, straight out of the camera apart from a resize.

200mm f2.8, 1/250, ISO400
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4075/4940845312_c1e7514507_b.jpg
100% crop
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4142/4940258071_255a12237a_b.jpg


70mm f2.8, 1/200, ISO100
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4118/4940470043_bb54f07ea6_b.jpg
100% crop
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4097/4940280387_fa6dde0ede_b.jpg


70mm f2.8, 1/3200, ISO100
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4135/4940846512_25f3d42ef7_b.jpg
100% crop
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4080/4940890178_8dc5feb38d_b.jpg


200mm f2.8, 1/3200, ISO100
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4082/4940258557_06609c5dfe_b.jpg
100% crop
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4141/4940890444_293e9794c1_b.jpg

[placidbabe]

147mm f/2.8, 1/1000, ISO 400
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4134/4940512783_43e524bd6a_b.jpg
100% Crop
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4082/4941099560_a7fe751900_b.jpg

.

180mm f/2.8, 1/320, ISO 200
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4094/4941098778_71a57d1e17_b.jpg
100% Crop
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4139/4940512375_fee28db7bc_b.jpg

.

200mm f/2.8, 1/320, ISO 100
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4101/4940511949_cf092dbcae_b.jpg
100% Crop
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4119/4940512109_19c097695b_b.jpg

.

104mm f/2.8, 1/640, ISO 400
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4079/4940512633_a4456fc2b6_b.jpg

[trancerem]

how's it is for portraiture ?
border sharpening and stuff :)

anyone have samples with full frame body ?

looks allright ... but not spectacullar ( guess its from the 1.6 senzor )

[placidbabe]

Here are some portraits that have been post processed. Bordered, sharpened and all that jazz :)

147mm, f/3.5, 1/500 sec. ISO 200
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4146/4948424542_2c81571239_b.jpg

200mm, f/3.5, 1/500 sec. ISO 200
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4098/4948424812_5fc5dc0625_b.jpg

104mm, f/2.8, 1/500 sec. ISO 100
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4151/4947835749_9e6dc1b7cd_b.jpg

And some cats..

157mm, f/2.8 1/640 sec. ISO 200
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4132/4947835521_0173206516_b.jpg

97mm, f/3.5, 1/500 sec. ISO 200
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4140/4948425856_8ebaaaecec_b.jpg

[Emilv]

Thanks for the sample shots! Would you tell which body you used for those shots because I'm very interested with this lens.

[DiMAn0684]

Thanks for the sample shots! Would you tell which body you used for those shots because I'm very interested with this lens.

Based on post #6 he's using a Rebel 450D aka XSi.

[Emilv]

oh! I didn't see that! Too excited to see sample of this lens! LOL! Thanks!

[-AP-]

oh! I didn't see that! Too excited to see sample of this lens! LOL! Thanks!

I've been waiting to see some samples from this lens as well..

Very nice so far..

[placidbabe]

Yep, all photos are taken with the 450D.

Here are a few more. Haven't really had a chance to get out of the backyard with it yet. I should be able to go out with it this week and get some more photos.

OS works well...
1/10 sec. 200mm f/2.8 ISO 800
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4088/4965745127_46394c99e3_b.jpg
Unedited 100% Crop
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4101/4940830807_3c366295f4_b.jpg

80mm, f/4, 1/320 sec. ISO 100
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4124/4966314322_8f07127fe2_b.jpg

97mm, f/3.5, 1/800 sec. ISO 400
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4125/4965711701_a3fee5eb6a_b.jpg

70mm, f/2.8, 1/3200 sec. ISO 100
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4129/4965713257_a85cdc39fd_b.jpg

[skier123]

Eagle in flight

1/800s f/5.6 ISO:100 Focal length 137.0mm Canon EOS 7D


100% crop

[Emilv]

Those are nice photos! I like the color so far. But, hows the AF on this one? Especially in low light?

[Emilv]

[QUOTE=placidbabe;10829123]Here are some portraits that have been post processed. Bordered, sharpened and all that jazz :)

147mm, f/3.5, 1/500 sec. ISO 200
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4146/4948424542_2c81571239_b.jpg

200mm, f/3.5, 1/500 sec. ISO 200
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4098/4948424812_5fc5dc0625_b.jpg

104mm, f/2.8, 1/500 sec. ISO 100
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4151/4947835749_9e6dc1b7cd_b.jpg

I like you're model! She's so cute!!! She's got a future in modelling! LOL!

[placidbabe]

The AF seems fine to me. I'm yet to test it in low light. I'll get it out tonight and see how it goes.

I like you're model! She's so cute!!! She's got a future in modelling! LOL!
Haha, thanks! It's my little sister, she loves being in front of my camera.



180mm, f/2.8, 1/800 sec. ISO 200
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4132/4984530841_bd04b1a142_b.jpg

70mm, f/2.8, 1/2500 sec. ISO 200
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4110/4985133166_412ef98139_b.jpg

180mm, f/2.8, 1/125 sec. ISO 100
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4088/4984532381_b4082b57fd_b.jpg

70mm, f/2.8, 1/2500 sec. ISO 100
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4109/4985134644_5106b7789c_b.jpg

200mm, f/2.8, 1/1250 sec. ISO 200
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4131/4984534055_dd43f070e6_b.jpg

200mm, f/2.8, 1/1000 sec. ISO 100
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4153/4985136114_cd0e0c6ce9_b.jpg

[placidbabe]

Hand held, all photos are ISO 100 at 157mm straight out of the camera:

f/2.8, 1/800 sec.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4086/4984637553_41d8e23e9e_b.jpg

f/4, 1/400 sec.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4145/4985244276_b078ee2d69_b.jpg

f/8, 1/100 sec.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4146/4985249802_7cb630196f_b.jpg

100% crops
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4133/4985299716_dbb12dfb58_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4092/4984698711_c1261e3039_b.jpg

[tkbslc]

Looks like the optics are quite good. Thanks for sharing.

[placidbabe]

147mm, f/4, 1/160 sec. ISO 200
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4083/4992113160_8631aeb73f_b.jpg

97mm, f/2.8, 1/1000 sec. ISO 400
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4153/4991507131_e9e93d6e9c_b.jpg

70mm, f/2.8, 1/800 sec. ISO 400
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4083/4991506123_6411b680f2_b.jpg

200 mm, f/3.5, 1/50 sec. ISO 1600
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4127/4991505125_4a93abfc2d_b.jpg

[tkbslc]

well who cares what the reviews say with sharp pics like these! :)

[KenjiS]

^- indeed, this changes my opinion on it

[placidbabe]

These 2 are straight from the camera:

200mm, f2.8, 1/1600 sec. ISO 100
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4085/4995701158_2cbc8869d0_b.jpg
100% crop
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4085/4995701512_4a272ed08d_b.jpg

200mm, f/4, 1/640 sec. ISO 100
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4145/4995701828_cedc81564b_b.jpg
100% crop
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4153/4995094097_a875a9dfd1_b.jpg


And I suppose this thread needs a moon :)
200mm, f/8, 1/160 sec. ISO 100.
100% crop; noise ninja + Sharpened in photoshop.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4087/4995092743_3f2430e4d1_b.jpg

[DStanic]

Not bad.. but is it better then the original 70-200 f/2.8L IS?

[KenjiS]

Not bad.. but is it better then the original 70-200 f/2.8L IS?

i dunno but its changing my opinion of it pretty fast...

[rjx]

Not bad.. but is it better then the original 70-200 f/2.8L IS?
As much as I wanted it to be better than the Canon mk1, or at least "as good," it doesn't appear (to me, based on image samples "I" have seen) that it is. But I want to see side by side comparisons before I pass judgment.

[DStanic]

As much as I wanted it to be better than the Canon mk1, or at least "as good," it doesn't appear (to me, based on image samples "I" have seen) that it is. But I want to see side by side comparisons before I pass judgment.

Yeah, the ones in this thread that placidbabe posted which look really good have had PP work done (sharpening as mentioned) the ones straight out of the camera look okay but I don't know if they are any better then the mk1. The school zone sign for example, you can tell a difference in sharpness between f/2.8 and f/4 (is the mk1 really any worse at f2.8?)

[placidbabe]

My situation in buying this lens was obviously a little different from you folks in the US. The price difference was a little more substantial. (Grrr lol)

If you're in a situation where the price difference between the sigma and the canon Mrk II is $1400, I would definitely recommend this lens. It would be worth it to seriously consider it in your options.

If you live in the US and the price difference is only $500, there is no way I could recommend this lens. If it means saving up another 2 more months to buy the canon, do it. The sigma has flaws, as mentioned in the reviews, and you'll be kicking yourself wondering why you just didn't throw an extra $500 in Canons direction. That lens looks like a winner.

Having said that, I'm enjoying this lens so far.
Hopefully I'll be off to the Zoo tomorrow. We'll see if I still have the same feelings towards the lens after that :lol:

[tkbslc]

The school zone sign for example, you can tell a difference in sharpness between f/2.8 and f/4 (is the mk1 really any worse at f2.8?)

The mk1 is definitely softer at f2.8 than 4. About 10% according to photozone and slrgear.

At some point, the mk1 is going to not be available new. And so then you have the choice of a used Canon lens or a brand new Sigma lens. I would imagine the IS unit is better in the Sigma as well.(Canon one is a bit dated). I would also imagine the price will settle a bit lower over time much like the non-OS sigmas. So that's the choice. A used Canon vs a new Sigma with what looks like similar real-world performance.

[KenjiS]

The mk1 is definitely softer at f2.8 than 4. About 10% according to photozone and slrgear.

At some point, the mk1 is going to not be available new. And so then you have the choice of a used Canon lens or a brand new Sigma lens. I would imagine the IS unit is better in the Sigma as well.(Canon one is a bit dated). I would also imagine the price will settle a bit lower over time much like the non-OS sigmas. So that's the choice. A used Canon vs a new Sigma with what looks like similar real-world performance.

Theres also the color question, as I point out a lot I really dont like white lenses personally..they grab too much attention and reflect more light than black ones...

Thats why i really was hoping for this lens to be closer to the Mk2 Canon, not necessarily as good, but damn close to it...or at least a few hundred less...

[placidbabe]

70mm, f/3.5, 1/1600 sec. ISO 400. Shot through glass
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4084/5007528680_778ee4014a_b.jpg

70mm, f/3.5, 1/1000 sec. ISO 400. Shot through glass.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4127/5006849807_178275e62f_b.jpg

128mm, f/2.8, 1/320 sec. ISO 400. Shot through glass.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4132/5006856467_8a4f1fe1e0_b.jpg

200mm, f/2.8, 1/250 sec. ISO 400
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4089/5006851913_fdc8cbe53d_b.jpg

200mm, f/2.8, 1/2000 sec. ISO 200
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4147/5006849119_94fdaa8992_b.jpg

112mm, f/4, 1/1000 sec. ISO 400
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4151/5007469088_fba8363ea7_b.jpg

137mm, f/2.8, 1/100 sec. ISO 1600
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4091/5006852599_7aaeede0f9_b.jpg

[placidbabe]

70mm, f/4, 1/200 sec. ISO 100
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4127/5022552014_7b20d37007_b.jpg

200mm, f/2.8, 1/160 sec. ISO 200
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4103/5021944937_44aba373b0_b.jpg

168mm, f/3.5, 1/400 sec. ISO 400
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4111/5022552532_3d0b30930c_b.jpg

70mm, f/4, 1/2500 sec. ISO 100
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4087/5022552802_ae21da636e_b.jpg

70mm, f/3.5, 1/1250 sec. ISO 100
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4092/5021945963_7bf7ef4883_b.jpg

[KenjiS]

^- Ok, Back on my wishlist now

[KayakPhotos]

I've shot the Canon Mark I a couple of times and this lens is definitely just as good, if not better. At 200mm it may be better, but it is hard for me to say having not actually used the lens myself. I wasn't even considering it after reading the first review, but now it's back on my list. I think that the canon Mark II is a little better, but once the price settles down on this one it should make a great alternative.

[rjx]

My situation in buying this lens was obviously a little different from you folks in the US. The price difference was a little more substantial. (Grrr lol)

If you're in a situation where the price difference between the sigma and the canon Mrk II is $1400, I would definitely recommend this lens. It would be worth it to seriously consider it in your options.

If you live in the US and the price difference is only $500, there is no way I could recommend this lens. If it means saving up another 2 more months to buy the canon, do it. The sigma has flaws, as mentioned in the reviews, and you'll be kicking yourself wondering why you just didn't throw an extra $500 in Canons direction. That lens looks like a winner.

Having said that, I'm enjoying this lens so far.
Hopefully I'll be off to the Zoo tomorrow. We'll see if I still have the same feelings towards the lens after that :lol:
I wasn't trying to imply anything negative about this lens. I think it looks pretty nice, especially you're zoo pics!

Considering Abe's has this lens for $1529.10 and the Canon mk2 for $2284.90, a savings of $755.80, I don't think that's bad. And used Canon MK1's go for a little less than a new Sigma with a warranty. I think the trade is not so bad.

If anyone is interested, BH has a used (9+) Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS for $1399
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/800725929-USE/Sigma_589101_70_200mm_f_2_8_EX_DG.html

If I had the money I would buy it! :rolleyes:

[KayakPhotos]

If I had the money I would buy it! :rolleyes:

Me too. Good eye!

[KenjiS]

I wasn't trying to imply anything negative about this lens. I think it looks pretty nice, especially you're zoo pics!

Considering Abe's has this lens for $1529.10 and the Canon mk2 for $2284.90, a savings of $755.80, I don't think that's bad. And used Canon MK1's go for a little less than a new Sigma with a warranty. I think the trade is not so bad.

If anyone is interested, BH has a used (9+) Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS for $1399
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/800725929-USE/Sigma_589101_70_200mm_f_2_8_EX_DG.html

If I had the money I would buy it! :rolleyes:

Whaaat? its listed at $1799 at Abe's like everywhere else?

[rjx]

Whaaat? its listed at $1799 at Abe's like everywhere else?
It's $1699 + 10% off instant savings code AALOYAL

[KayakPhotos]

Not really any action in here. For those that are considering this lens check this out. Here (http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/articles/sigma_70-200_os_hsm_review.htm)

At current new prices, I would go Canon. Once this lens drops or starts to enter the used market at cheaper prices I think I will jump on it.

[KenjiS]

Not really any action in here. For those that are considering this lens check this out. Here (http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/articles/sigma_70-200_os_hsm_review.htm)

At current new prices, I would go Canon. Once this lens drops or starts to enter the used market at cheaper prices I think I will jump on it.

indeed, Too expensive for its performance in relation to the mk2...

[sporadic]

$1350 @ B&H here: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/689577-REG/Sigma_589101_70_200mm_f_2_8_EX_DG.html?cm_sp=Holid ay~2010-_-Red_Zone-_-689577

Thinking this may be a nice Christmas present for myself...

[rjx]

$1350 @ B&H here: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/689577-REG/Sigma_589101_70_200mm_f_2_8_EX_DG.html?cm_sp=Holid ay~2010-_-Red_Zone-_-689577 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/689577-REG/Sigma_589101_70_200mm_f_2_8_EX_DG.html?cm_sp=Holid ay%7E2010-_-Red_Zone-_-689577)

Thinking this may be a nice Christmas present for myself...
That looks like it's the price for a new lens. I see nothing about it being used, refurbished, gray market or a demo. :shock:

[Combatmedic870]

Now thats MUCH better price wise! $100 less and I think thats where is should be at! :D
I still cant find anything of it against the canon v1

[KayakPhotos]

It's the same price on amazon as well. I would probably pick one up if I had the money right now.

[rjx]

If this price sticks, more people should but it. And eventually there will be a bunch used for way cheap. Maybe like $1100

Be nice if Abes lowers it to $1350 and lets you apply the 10% off code.

[KayakPhotos]

If this price sticks, more people should but it. And eventually there will be a bunch used for way cheap. Maybe like $1100

Be nice if Abes lowers it to $1350 and lets you apply the 10% off code.

That would be nice. I'd probably go new so I could send it in, but I don't have MFA on my 40D's...

[DStanic]

The new price ALMOST has me thinking about this lens. Still think I wanna get a 135L first, but if the price drops a bit more and I can find a comparison to some Canon L's maybe.....

[KayakPhotos]

The new price ALMOST has me thinking about this lens. Still think I wanna get a 135L first, but if the price drops a bit more and I can find a comparison to some Canon L's maybe.....

Juza has a comparison on his website to the 70-200 IS II. here (http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/articles/sigma_70-200_os_hsm_review.htm)

[mtakako]

Sales is over at BH. Price back to 1699.

[Techuser]

Any samples with teleconverters?

[renlok]

its been 4 weeks since last post :S
I would also like to see some samples with teleconverters??

[renlok]

just picked up the lens

a few test shots,
All images below, no pp or editing apart from cropping, taken on a 40d

1/500 sec at f/6.3 iso100 200mm
http://renlok.com/site/misc/images/110113-33-1.jpg
100%
http://renlok.com/site/misc/images/110113-100-1.jpg

1/10sec at F/2.8 iso100 112mm
http://renlok.com/site/misc/images/110113-33-2.jpg
100%
http://renlok.com/site/misc/images/110113-100-2.jpg

1/400 sec at f/6.3 iso100 200mm
http://renlok.com/site/misc/images/110113-33-3.jpg
100%
http://renlok.com/site/misc/images/110113-1003-3.jpg

1/200 sec at f/6.3 iso100 200mm
http://renlok.com/site/misc/images/110113-33-4.jpg
100%
http://renlok.com/site/misc/images/110113-100-100-4.jpg

[professoryeti]

Got a deal that was way too good to pass up. Crappy Blackberry photo, but I had to share my joy. Photos on the LCD look sharp sharp sharp right down to 1/20 of a second. Can't wait to do some real tests this evening.

[professoryeti]

A quick sample

200mm 1/20 f/5.6 ISO400
http://www.joshnibertphotography.com/photos/1169136433_eP5Ks-L.jpg (http://www.joshnibertphotography.com/Photography/POTN/15603491_tomZq#1169136433_eP5Ks-A-LB)

Crop
http://www.joshnibertphotography.com/photos/1169136502_K6j7j-L.jpg (http://www.joshnibertphotography.com/Photography/POTN/15603491_tomZq#1169136502_K6j7j-A-LB)

The beauty itself:
http://www.joshnibertphotography.com/photos/1169136405_Cyh3B-L.jpg (http://www.joshnibertphotography.com/Photography/POTN/15603491_tomZq#1169136405_Cyh3B-A-LB)

[rjx]

DPR (link) (http://www.dpreview.com/news/1101/110131015sigma70200mmpricedrop.asp)reported that Sigma has lowered the price to $1399. I just checked Abes and they have it listed at $1399. If you use the classic AALOYAL code the shipped price will be $1273.09.

Just a friendly heads up for those who are interested in this lens. Used prices will probably be around $1100.

[datawiz2012]

Does anyone have sample images from low light indoor portraits and especially low light action.

[KenjiS]

DPR (link) (http://www.dpreview.com/news/1101/110131015sigma70200mmpricedrop.asp)reported that Sigma has lowered the price to $1399. I just checked Abes and they have it listed at $1399. If you use the classic AALOYAL code the shipped price will be $1273.09.

Just a friendly heads up for those who are interested in this lens. Used prices will probably be around $1100.

At that price this lens just reentered consideration for me...

Now theres a much larger distance in terms of price between it and the Mk2 Canon IS which is currently $2374 at Adorama (OUCH!) I cant see the extra $1000 being worth it (unlike before when the Canon was $2100 and the Sigma was $1800...the $300 was well spent..)

Adorama hasnt lowered the price yet, but i expect they will soon

I rather liked this lens, but didnt feel it was worth $1800, Now its back in consideration

[Porkywill]

God I love the idea of this lens, but can't help feeling that a part of that is because it is an affordable alternative to the Canon 2.8II IS??

I was after the canon f4 but I think I want 2.8 so I can use a TC if need be. I can't afford the Canon mkII but I can afford the Sigma...

I just wish I could man up and decide!

[arcticfoxchar]

Porkywill,

I bought this lens for sports and stuff. I think you will be happy with it. Try it at the store if you must...but I am very happy with mine and even added another sigma 85f1.4

took pics of bees and flowers and also running soccer players.

Take the plunge with both feet snappping all the way down! :D

[datawiz2012]

I just wish I could man up and decide!

Join the club!

[datawiz2012]

Porkywill,

I bought this lens for sports and stuff. I think you will be happy with it. Try it at the store if you must...but I am very happy with mine and even added another sigma 85f1.4

took pics of bees and flowers and also running soccer players.

Take the plunge with both feet snappping all the way down! :D

Do you by chance have any low light (especially indoor sports) pics to share.

[rjx]

Keep in mind a nice used 70-200 2.8 IS mkl as a wonderful alternative in the same price range.

[Porkywill]

Keep in mind a nice used 70-200 2.8 IS mkl as a wonderful alternative in the same price range.

Well that is an option but it's all older technology whereas the sigma is brand new...?

[DiMAn0684]

Juza has a comparison on his website to the 70-200 IS II. here (http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/articles/sigma_70-200_os_hsm_review.htm)

Very good review, thanks for the link. I definitely agree with the reviewer, once this Sigma will be available for $900-$1100 it will be a very attractive option but for now I suspect people will still go for a used Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS Mk I.

[Marlfox]

I was at a model shoot today and SIgma were loaning out lenses, used one for an hour. WIll post some pictures up when I get a chance.

Had no control over the light, so they're not amazing...plus 20 people trying to shoot the same model = fun!

http://mintymarlfox.smugmug.com/Galleries/American-Model-Shoot/AMS-088/1178684330_BBzmV-M.png

http://mintymarlfox.smugmug.com/Galleries/American-Model-Shoot/AMS-117/1178706067_3eyPn-M.png

http://mintymarlfox.smugmug.com/Galleries/American-Model-Shoot/AMS-001/1178718255_XGTMA-M.png

http://mintymarlfox.smugmug.com/Galleries/American-Model-Shoot/AMS-037/1178735467_KBoUQ-M.png

[rjx]

Well that is an option but it's all older technology whereas the sigma is brand new...?
True. But that doesn't mean the Canon mk1 is inferior to the Sigma.

I know there has been reviews where the Canon mk2 was compared to the Sigma OS, and the Canon wins. Has anyone seen any reviews where the Canon mk1 was compared to the Sigma OS? My guess is the Canon mk1 is still the better lens in terms of IQ and performance. Would like to see a real comparison.

[renlok]

Heres a few hand held
http://renlok.com/site/misc/20110202-swan/20110202-IMG_0810-swan.jpg
http://renlok.com/site/misc/20110202-swan/20110202-IMG_0815-swan.jpg
http://renlok.com/site/misc/20110202-swan/20110202-IMG_0826-swan.jpg

[renlok]

Heres 1 more, Hand held with a 40d
http://renlok.com/site/misc/20110202-swan/20110203-IMG_0910-bigturtle2.jpg

100%
http://renlok.com/site/misc/20110202-swan/20110203-IMG_0910-bigturtle.jpg

[KayakPhotos]

True. But that doesn't mean the Canon mk1 is inferior to the Sigma.

I know there has been reviews where the Canon mk2 was compared to the Sigma OS, and the Canon wins. Has anyone seen any reviews where the Canon mk1 was compared to the Sigma OS? My guess is the Canon mk1 is still the better lens in terms of IQ and performance. Would like to see a real comparison.

I don't have any scientific evidence, but I will say that I owned a Sigma 70-200 non OS for two years and rented the Canon IS version 1 for events a few times. The copy of the Canon I rented was basically the same in image quality (I preferred the colors and bokeh slightly on the Canon) and sharpness. I actually thought that my Sigma was sharper at 200mm and f/2.8. They were VERY close.

Based on this, I would guess that the new Sigma is sharper towards 200mm at f/2.8 than the original Canon. Where the Canon still wins is in build quality and weather sealing. The corner sharpness is usually better on Canon lenses as well, but that may or may not matter depending on what the user needs the lens for. It's a tough call.

[bfung]

Opinions on the Sigma vs the canon 70-200 F4 IS? Isn't much of a price difference but I've been wanting the canon for awhile, but now that sigma has lowered prices i'm not too sure

[KenjiS]

Opinions on the Sigma vs the canon 70-200 F4 IS? Isn't much of a price difference but I've been wanting the canon for awhile, but now that sigma has lowered prices i'm not too sure

To me? I'd get the sigma, f/2.8 on a 70-200 is more useful to me than f/4...

[datawiz2012]

Opinions on the Sigma vs the canon 70-200 F4 IS? Isn't much of a price difference but I've been wanting the canon for awhile, but now that sigma has lowered prices i'm not too sure

With Canon's price hikes, the new price of Sigma makes more sense now. I was on the fence with f4 but with the Sigma virtually at the same co$t of f4, this decision has become very difficult.

[Porkywill]

I'm glad I'm not the only one!!

Will

[minstral]

I'm looking into the Canon f4 IS also. If the Sigma is v. close to the Canon across the zoom range at f4 and below I'd go Sigma. The extra stops and IS would be well worth it.

Looking forward to any comparisons anyone can make

[Porkywill]

I don't have sound so I don't know if this is of any use!!

http://www.digitalrev.com/en/battle-of-the-bokeh-canon-70-200mm-f2-dot-8l-is-ii-usm-vs-sigma-70-200mm-os-hsm-7833-article.html

DigitalRev are selling this lens for £799 and HDEW for £899 at the moment. Pretty reasonable for what the lens is if you ask me. I'm so close to clicking on it now, just a little more convincing!

Will

[Marlfox]

Damn, it's $1200 to the US from DR. That's sooo tempting. I was happy with the pics I got with it, but the 70-200 F4 L is still tempting due to the fact it's an 'L'.

Then factor in that for $1500 or so you can get the Canon Mk 1 2.8 IS....

Too many decisions lol. I want toknow how ths Sigma does through a Teleconverter as well.

[datawiz2012]

I don't have sound so I don't know if this is of any use!!

http://www.digitalrev.com/en/battle-of-the-bokeh-canon-70-200mm-f2-dot-8l-is-ii-usm-vs-sigma-70-200mm-os-hsm-7833-article.html

DigitalRev are selling this lens for £799 and HDEW for £899 at the moment. Pretty reasonable for what the lens is if you ask me. I'm so close to clicking on it now, just a little more convincing!

Will

Have you bought from them before? When people discuss (on this forum) buying online, I rarely see anyone mention anything other than B&H, Amazon, or Adorama. Digitalrev prices are a bit cheaper.

[professoryeti]

I have decided to sell my Sigma 70-200 OS

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=994234

Great lens, but I'm shooting with strobes at f/9 right now so the things that make this lens great are being lost on me.

[Porkywill]

I've never bought from DR but I've heard good and bad reviews.

I've managed to watch the videos with sound now, and whilst he reckons the Sigma doesn't quite square up to the Canon, which I'm not entirely surprised about, what it does do, it seems to do well.

Plus, it is about £1000 cheaper which works for me!

Will

[placidbabe]

200mm, f/4, 1/500sec. ISO200

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5132/5426967700_fd3125e14a_b.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5096/5426363355_2e64e572a8_b.jpg


147mm, f/4, 1/200sec. ISO200
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5299/5426363727_995e1da889_b.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5136/5426968906_9266ebed0c_b.jpg


180mm, f/3.5, 1/1600 sec. ISO400
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5015/5426969364_fa3c4b8b1a_b.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5057/5426365217_c4fa600672_b.jpg

[placidbabe]

104mm, f/3.5, 1/4000 sec. ISO200
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5215/5426970064_ec7e45cb06_b.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5015/5426366019_6465ef1e48_b.jpg


70mm, f/3.5, 1/1000 sec. ISO400 through glass
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5297/5426366481_db37b9d548_b.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5052/5426366751_972c7cdc90_b.jpg


168mm, f/3.2, 1/320 sec. ISO400 through grid fence
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5019/5426367143_4d27b1ee8c_b.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5054/5426972190_fe3df5b531_b.jpg

[Marlfox]

Wow. I knew the lens looked sharp to me, you just proved it Placidbabe. Assume your happy with yours?

[placidbabe]

Now some 'finished' shots..

70mm, f/4, 1/320 sec. ISO100
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5258/5429284599_158b5e4aae_b.jpg

91mm, f/4, 1/1250 sec. ISO100
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5178/5429284047_2003e6c8a2_b.jpg


86mm, f/4, 1/1000 sec. ISO100
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5291/5429890670_cd7aaf99c7_b.jpg


137mm, f/3.2, 1/800 sec. ISO100
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5295/5429282737_0cff7a43f8_b.jpg


70mm, f/2.8, 1/1000 sec. ISO100
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5180/5429282187_0aeb4d272f_b.jpg

[placidbabe]

Wow. I knew the lens looked sharp to me, you just proved it Placidbabe. Assume your happy with yours?

Well this is the best lens I've ever owned. I'm fairly new to photography. So yes, as happy as an ignorant person can be ;) I can't really judge it because I don't have any other experience apart from kit lenses. So I just let everyone judge themselves from the photos :lol:

[minstral]

Well this is the best lens I've ever owned. I'm fairly new to photography. So yes, as happy as an ignorant person can be ;) I can't really judge it because I don't have any other experience apart from kit lenses. So I just let everyone judge themselves from the photos :lol:

Great photos placidbabe, and decent shots SOOC at f/4. Tempting. At Simplyelectronics.net the £ price is pretty dam close to the canon f/4 IS

[curlydog]

So I pulled the trigger and order her this morning, should be here by the weekend

[arentol]

100% crops from today.
Converted to jpg straight out of camera. No PP at all.

137mm - f/4 - 1/100 - ISO 100
http://mikehj.smugmug.com/Street-Scenes/Street-Photography/girlonstreettwo100crop/1195123077_DAfT4-L.jpg

200mm - f/4 - 1/100 - ISO 100
http://mikehj.smugmug.com/Street-Scenes/Street-Photography/girlonstreet100crop/1195123020_Ym6BV-L.jpg

200mm - f/2.8 - 1/320 - ISO 100
http://mikehj.smugmug.com/Street-Scenes/Street-Photography/Manwithchild100crop/1195123120_7Jjji-L.jpg

200mm - f/2.8 - 1/160 - ISO 100
http://mikehj.smugmug.com/Street-Scenes/Street-Photography/oldmansmoking100crop/1195123220_gBNEE-L.jpg

104mm - f/2.8 - 1/200 - ISO 100
http://mikehj.smugmug.com/Street-Scenes/Street-Photography/oldlady100crop/1195123192_ywqfQ-L.jpg

With Sigma 1.4 TC - 280mm - f/4.0 - 1/80 - ISO 400
http://mikehj.smugmug.com/Street-Scenes/Street-Photography/Relaxingman100crop/1195123274_q2CZU-L.jpg

I (not the camera) slightly missed focus on a couple of these by aiming for the face in general rather than the eyes. I am still working on my technique and discipline.

I would crop most of these differently for printing/use. Just posted them this way to show how sharp this lens can be. These were mostly taken with AI-Servo AF. On my 5dII I hit focus about 80-90% of the time, including while shooting the skateboarder in action in my next post.

[arentol]

Some more shots from today, not 100% crops this time.
Again SOOC converted to jpg with no PP. All are cropped to some degree.

86mm - f/2.8 - 1/100 - ISO 100
http://mikehj.smugmug.com/Street-Scenes/Street-Photography/catchat/1195122783_aknK6-L.jpg
(And yes, the cat does ride on his neck sometimes when he skates).

200mm - f/2.8 - 1/250 - ISO 100
http://mikehj.smugmug.com/Street-Scenes/Street-Photography/catskatersmoke/1195122975_oaAC3-L.jpg

137mm - f/2.8 - 1/500 - ISO 200
http://mikehj.smugmug.com/Street-Scenes/Street-Photography/Airtime/1195122740_PWpnE-L.jpg

200mm - f/2.8 - 1/200 - ISO 100
http://mikehj.smugmug.com/Street-Scenes/Street-Photography/manonbench/1195123277_kxmjG-L.jpg

157mm - f/2.8 - 1/160 - ISO 100
http://mikehj.smugmug.com/Street-Scenes/Street-Photography/walkingcouple/1195123530_gWcL9-L.jpg

200mm - f/4 - 1/125 - ISO 100
http://mikehj.smugmug.com/Street-Scenes/Street-Photography/asadmoment/1195122528_SvJwL-L.jpg
A friend of this girl was stabbed in the neck just a couple minutes before this shot was taken. She was obviously quite upset.

Link to info on stabbing:
http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattle911/2011/02/21/man-stabbed-in-neck-in-downtown-seattle/

[curlydog]

It has arrived! Now to find time to un-box it and a d0 little shooting with it before Thursday night's show

[Maurice A.]

Here are a few with the new lens.

[curlydog]

Taken @ my daughter's last dance competition
http://curlydog.com/photos/IMG_6730b.JPG

[lwright84]

Just took this baby out for the first time to the Rangers game and I loved it!! I should have some pics up this weekend, but needless to say... amazing lens. :D

[datawiz2012]

HAs anyone of you taken this lens to a beach frequently. Do you think it being non-weather sealed, sand will creep into the focus and zoom rings?

[mbcBulldog]

is this lens are Compatible W/ canon Extender EF 1.4x II??

[Dunderhead]

I ordered this lens and it came in today. I was only able to putz around with it briefly. I will have an opportunity to try it out more extensively tomorrow. I am excited about it and hope it works out.

[KenjiS]

Here are a few with the new lens.

gorgeous photos!

[Maurice A.]

Thanks KenjiS.

[placidbabe]

-Basic editing on all. Sharpen/contrast/etc.
f/4 1/4000 ISO-200 @ 86mm
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5309/5671876543_bdc90feaf0_b.jpg


f/2.8 1/200 ISO-400 @ 200mm
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5270/5671877051_4fb4de4dc5_b.jpg


f/4 1/80 ISO-200 @ 180mm (Was on the phone while taking the picture and didn't realise bad settings. Though still came out sharp at 1/80 handheld :) )
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5188/5671877631_9a21cfb6b5_b.jpg


f/2.8 1/1600 ISO-100 @ 200mm
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5027/5672445496_ab1d81da03_b.jpg


f/4 1/250 ISO-200 @157mm
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5021/5672446186_1e9f3ffd5c_b.jpg

[lwright84]

I had seats to the back right of home plate, so as you can tell in some shots the protective net got in the way. However this baby didn't have the slightest problem. :D I had a blast using this lens that night and cant wait to use it more and more.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5110/5677587320_974c6cf9cc_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwright84/5677587320/)
20110426-IMG_2066.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwright84/5677587320/) by lwright84_ (http://www.flickr.com/people/lwright84/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5189/5677032115_0d4c2cab88_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwright84/5677032115/)
20110426-IMG_2133.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwright84/5677032115/) by lwright84_ (http://www.flickr.com/people/lwright84/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5066/5677591112_0b09e4f2c3_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwright84/5677591112/)
20110426-IMG_2138.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwright84/5677591112/) by lwright84_ (http://www.flickr.com/people/lwright84/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5267/5677586322_2da4cdef8a_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwright84/5677586322/)
20110426-IMG_2062.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwright84/5677586322/) by lwright84_ (http://www.flickr.com/people/lwright84/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5181/5677031105_3721d34499_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwright84/5677031105/)
20110426-IMG_2114.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwright84/5677031105/) by lwright84_ (http://www.flickr.com/people/lwright84/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5181/5677033211_7fd2ef831e_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwright84/5677033211/)
20110426-IMG_2148.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwright84/5677033211/) by lwright84_ (http://www.flickr.com/people/lwright84/), on Flickr

[lwright84]

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5021/5677589348_605eb89f34_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwright84/5677589348/)
20110426-IMG_2103.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwright84/5677589348/) by lwright84_ (http://www.flickr.com/people/lwright84/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5307/5677587620_f1a8ddda63_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwright84/5677587620/)
20110426-IMG_2070.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwright84/5677587620/) by lwright84_ (http://www.flickr.com/people/lwright84/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5303/5677590336_2ec5e71d9d_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwright84/5677590336/)
20110426-IMG_2120.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwright84/5677590336/) by lwright84_ (http://www.flickr.com/people/lwright84/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5150/5677030417_dedbb800a4_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwright84/5677030417/)
20110426-IMG_2098.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwright84/5677030417/) by lwright84_ (http://www.flickr.com/people/lwright84/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5021/5678123706_b1320800a9_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwright84/5678123706/)
20110426-IMG_2057.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lwright84/5678123706/) by lwright84_ (http://www.flickr.com/people/lwright84/), on Flickr

[datawiz2012]

My question is going to get lost in the flurry of fantastic images. So here it goes again: Has anyone of you taken this lens to a beach frequently. Do you think it being non-weather sealed, sand will creep into the focus and zoom rings? I will obviously never take it into rain or too close to the waves, so getting it wet is out of question. It is the sand particles I am worried about. I spend half a day at beach every second beach and the camera is always with me.

[bswpu012]

Great photos at the Rangers game! That 1.6x gives the lens a perfect reach! Can only imagine how versatile their upcoming 120-300mm OS is gonna look on a crop sensor... $$

[maxwell1295]

Loving this lens so far. Will post up some pics when I get a chance...

[MattD]

Iv had the lens for about an hour, and so far (after one hour so it means nothing really) I love it...

I have noticed on thing - this was mentiond in a review, and I thought I best test it. But it would seem that at 200mm its not really 200mm.

In this image you can see its more like 180mm than 200mm. I wonder what this means for Sigma - The lens does not really do what it says it does.

I also tried adding two teleconverters, and as you can see the IQ is still suprisingly good, focusing does not work but it was only an experiment :)

With a single teleconverter it works fine, the focusing speed is pretty good with or without :)

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5262/5690380171_d174742d6e_b.jpg

[placidbabe]

f/2.8 1/500 ISO-400 @200mm
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5305/5695357238_7f0c99389d_b.jpg


f/4 1/200 ISO-400 @70mm
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2208/5694785643_9aa22105c4_b.jpg


f/4 1/1600 ISO-400 @86mm
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3412/5694783849_64620d7a3e_b.jpg


My question is going to get lost in the flurry of fantastic images. So here it goes again: Has anyone of you taken this lens to a beach frequently. Do you think it being non-weather sealed, sand will creep into the focus and zoom rings?Sorry I deliberatlely didn't answer you because I don't really know the answer. I've taken mine to a beach once and didn't even think much of it.
Your current lenses aren't weather sealed, are they? So if you're comfortable taking those I'm not sure why this one should be any different. So long as you're careful I think it should be fine, but of course, anything can happen.

[dr_devious]

Are there any significant functionality differences between the HSM II and the OS version beside the Optical Stabilizer? It sounds like the OS version is pretty amazing in terms of AF and IQ...can the same be expected of the non-OS?

[Sirrith]

the OS version has a different optical design and is meant to be much better optically.

[dr_devious]

the OS version has a different optical design and is meant to be much better optically.

Thank you for the answer....I bought this lens today! Can't wait to try it out tomorrow!

[bswpu012]

I bought the 17-50mm 2.8 DC OS Sigma and am so impressed it looks like I'll be ordering one of these as well in order to test it against the Canon 2.8 IS II i just got. I'll only have 3-4 days but could save $1100... Would I be the first to return the 2.8 IS II after buying this lens????

[wizard2340]

I bought the 17-50mm 2.8 DC OS Sigma and am so impressed it looks like I'll be ordering one of these as well in order to test it against the Canon 2.8 IS II i just got. I'll only have 3-4 days but could save $1100... Would I be the first to return the 2.8 IS II after buying this lens????

You may be the first but you probably won’t be disappointed with your decision. The Sigma is a really nice piece and as long as you just use it and don’t spend your time pixel peeping you’re never going to notice the difference. The focus on mine is fast and accurate right out of the box and honestly I much more prefer the black versus the white (not that it was a decision maker).

If you test the Sigma versus the Canon in "lab" test and are looking for differences you are going to notice the canon is the best quality, but the sigma quality is definitely more than adequate.

[bswpu012]

The Sigma is a really nice piece and as long as you just use it and don’t spend your time pixel peeping you’re never going to notice the difference. The focus on mine is fast and accurate right out of the box and honestly I much more prefer the black versus the white (not that it was a decision maker).

I was walking around testing the Canon IS II yesterday and it is very dificult to blend in with the size and color combination of the lens. The point of a zoom (for me) is mostly to remain as invisible as possible. It's the best way to get those great candid shots, and the all-black lens should hide so much better. Like you said, it won't be the ultimate decision maker for me, but something to consider...

[MattD]

would anyone mind testing there lens for me and see if this holds true for you too?

See link
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=12408633#post12408633

[wizard2340]

would anyone mind testing there lens for me and see if this holds true for you too?

See link
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=12408633#post12408633

I'll give mine a test in the morning and let you know how the rings feel.

[TooManyShots]

Oh my, what have I done!!! I have to blame Bill Me Later for this. I would never expect them to give me the extra credits for this purchase. It was approved. Yes, I have just ordered it from Beach Camera. May the Sigma god bless me on this and I don't have to send it in to Sigma for recalibration. I don't mind doing that but I need this lens to work perfectly on this weekend. I will be putting it into good use, as if it was intended to be used. I am shooting a cycling race with it.

[justanothaguy]

welp after much reading and debate I just pulled the trigger and ordered one a few hours ago.. Its going to be my first "nice" lens

hopefully I will have some pics to add to this thread sometime in the near future :)

[TooManyShots]

Is here. A heavy lens. Mine still has some mixed parts with the old finish. Tripod collar and both the zoom and focus rings have the old finish. However, AF is spot on, using my simple water bottle test. That's all I could comment. Can't test the IQ since it is raining outside.

[Sirrith]

Well I've decided that I'm going to get myself one of these sometime in june/july :)

[mchong75]

Is here. A heavy lens. Mine still has some mixed parts with the old finish. Tripod collar and both the zoom and focus rings have the old finish. However, AF is spot on, using my simple water bottle test. That's all I could comment. Can't test the IQ since it is raining outside.

It would have been so much nicer if they finished the entire body with the new smooth finish. I hate the cheap look of the old finish.....

[TooManyShots]

It would have been so much nicer if they finished the entire body with the new smooth finish. I hate the cheap look of the old finish.....


Is not so bad. I bet I can request a warranty repair to replace the tripod collar later. Now, people can easily mistaken me using a Nikon lens. :) I think I will like this lens. Just did a quick AF, AI servo test. Trying to have the lens to switch focus on each of the 4 water bottles while holding the "*" button. OS seems to cause AF error, which is expected. The lens nails each of the bottle. On my initial test, I was using AI Servo mode, handholding the lens. I was sitting down though. Shooting wide open of course. I say the AF is speedy, similar to my 24-70L. Tomorrow I have to find some ducks to shoot and maybe doing some shots on cyclists riding around the park.

[mchong75]

I wonder if this lens is worth the price vs. Canon IS Mark I.....

By the way, Sigma 150mm f/2.8 AF APO EX DG OS macro lens has the new finish tripod collar.

[TooManyShots]

I wonder if this lens is worth the price vs. Canon IS Mark I.....

By the way, Sigma 150mm f/2.8 AF APO EX DG OS macro lens has the new finish tripod collar.


For one thing, you can't buy the Canon markI anymore. The used price is around $1500+. I haven't seen one for sales for a while. They usually go quick. If you need weather sealing, yeah, get the Canon markI. If you have the money, get the Canon markII.

[mchong75]

For one thing, you can't buy the Canon markI anymore. The used price is around $1500+. I haven't seen one for sales for a while. They usually go quick. If you need weather sealing, yeah, get the Canon markI. If you have the money, get the Canon markII.

I already have the Mark II.

I was thinking about buying the Mark I or the Sigma for my GF (Just afraid to lend her my Mark II LOL)...weather sealing isn't important but AF and IQ. :)

[Jan Jasinski]

Looks like this lens isn't as sharp as the Canon f/2.8L (non IS). I am considering one of them, but my local store is selling this for 1,4K with a 200$ worth tripod free...

[TooManyShots]

Looks like this lens isn't as sharp as the Canon f/2.8L (non IS). I am considering one of them, but my local store is selling this for 1,4K with a 200$ worth tripod free...


Are you sure? The review I read, check the URL on this thread, shows that it isn't far off from the Canon MarkII.

[Maurice A.]

The AF and IQ are great . It is every bit as sharp if not sharper than the canon Mark 1.

[Jan Jasinski]

Are you sure? The review I read, check the URL on this thread, shows that it isn't far off from the Canon MarkII.
Ok. My Norwegian friend who is with Canon (owner of a 600F/4L lol) told me he used it and it's just as good as the MK1 Canon version. If I do get this I don't think i'll be able to get the 1.4 or 2x TC (does Canon one go with Siggy's?). I wish this one was white too :(

[TooManyShots]

Ok. My Norwegian friend who is with Canon (owner of a 600F/4L lol) told me he used it and it's just as good as the MK1 Canon version. If I do get this I don't think i'll be able to get the 1.4 or 2x TC (does Canon one go with Siggy's?). I wish this one was white too :(


I just tried it. It works and it fits. Is just that it isn't white..:)

[Jan Jasinski]

I just tried it. It works and it fits. Is just that it isn't white..:)
Thanks. Btw, not sure if this goes for MKII or Sigma lenses but if you turn off the IS at high shutter speeds you get more image quality, tested it myself! This is why I want to go for the Canon non IS, then again that requires purchase of a tripod for cases I cannot handhold it. I could get the MKI instead of this but then no tripod which would be a bummer for me... It's hard sigh.

[TooManyShots]

Here is a test shot on the effectiveness of the OS. Could be IQ too but these aren't exactly a worthy shot with good composition and subject.

1dmarkIII, ISO 1000, F2.8, 200mm, 1/80sec. Handheld and AI Servo mode focusing. Level 7 sharpening in DPP. Standard picture style. RAW converted to JPEG.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5226/5734932709_fd747fa171_b.jpg

100% crop. Focus point was on the word "Direction."

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5146/5734933261_5c1278c812_o.jpg

[TooManyShots]

Here are the test shots in the real world. I am pleased with the results. I have taken over 200 shots and only about 10 of them I couldn't use. That was because I was doing some panning shots with the OS enabled. I just realized I was either shooting at the wide end of the zoom or the longest end of the zoom. Only few shots in between. Post processing is kept to minimum. Just using DPP.

f2.8. 137mm. Level 7 DPP raw sharpening. Standard picture style. +1 on both Contrast and Saturation. 100% crop. AI Servo mode focusing.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5225/5737345943_ec50ea7fa1_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/vracing/5737345943/in/photostream)

f3.2. 200mm. Level 7 DPP raw sharpening. Standard picture style. +1 on both Contrast and Saturation. 100% crop. AI Servo mode focusing.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2121/5737343165_f3c2a73f9c_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/vracing/5737343165/in/photostream)

Same setting as the above.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3176/5737894674_813c6a99a2_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/vracing/5737894674/in/photostream)


Testing the AF with panning shots. 70mm.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2387/5737344817_f7d899f9c2_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/vracing/5737344817/in/photostream)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3442/5737896198_8de9261b21_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/vracing/5737896198/in/photostream)

[TooManyShots]

One more, the serious shot with serious post processing. F5.6. 112mm.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2510/5738047504_8f1f0f4d46_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/vracing/5738047504/in/photostream)

[The Outlaw]

i've been considering buying one of these when funds permit. i wanted a canon but for the price of a used mkI with no warranty i could buy one of these brand new with full warranty.

[TooManyShots]

That's it. This lens is a keeper. In fact, I am thinking about selling my 135L as well. Tested this lens in a bike race today, shooting the amateur elite riders.

Here is one of the many panning shots I took. He was probably going about 26 or 27 mph and making a pass at me around 20ft, around a corner, with a the sun at my 3 o clock.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5190/5743048413_85c41e13cc_b.jpg ( http://www.flickr.com/photos/vracing/5743048413/in/photostream)

[MattD]

Could you lovly gals and guys mind telling me how your zoom ring is...I bought the lens and generally speaking im very pleased with it, but iv noticed one small (maybe problematic) issue..

When the lens is pointing down the zoom rings stops being smooth and starts to jitter when I turn it. Im guessing this is because the glass element inside the lens is (due to gravity) pushing down and forcing the zoom ring to kinda stick. Iv also noticed its more prone to juttering when the focus ring is set to around infinity.

Im not overyly worried about it, but if its a sign of a larger issue ill return it while I can. Iv also never owned lens quite like this, and im unsure what to expect - so any advice would be great ?

[dr_devious]

Could you lovly gals and guys mind telling me how your zoom ring is...I bought the lens and generally speaking im very pleased with it, but iv noticed one small (maybe problematic) issue..

When the lens is pointing down the zoom rings stops being smooth and starts to jitter when I turn it. Im guessing this is because the glass element inside the lens is (due to gravity) pushing down and forcing the zoom ring to kinda stick. Iv also noticed its more prone to juttering when the focus ring is set to around infinity.

Im not overyly worried about it, but if its a sign of a larger issue ill return it while I can. Iv also never owned lens quite like this, and im unsure what to expect - so any advice would be great ?


FWIW, I have shot with this lens for about two weeks and shot three events and I have not encountered this issue...

[KenjiS]

Could you lovly gals and guys mind telling me how your zoom ring is...I bought the lens and generally speaking im very pleased with it, but iv noticed one small (maybe problematic) issue..

When the lens is pointing down the zoom rings stops being smooth and starts to jitter when I turn it. Im guessing this is because the glass element inside the lens is (due to gravity) pushing down and forcing the zoom ring to kinda stick. Iv also noticed its more prone to juttering when the focus ring is set to around infinity.

Im not overyly worried about it, but if its a sign of a larger issue ill return it while I can. Iv also never owned lens quite like this, and im unsure what to expect - so any advice would be great ?

I'd exchange it...Sounds like somethings wrong to me

[placidbabe]

Could you lovly gals and guys mind telling me how your zoom ring is...I bought the lens and generally speaking im very pleased with it, but iv noticed one small (maybe problematic) issue..

When the lens is pointing down the zoom rings stops being smooth and starts to jitter when I turn it. Im guessing this is because the glass element inside the lens is (due to gravity) pushing down and forcing the zoom ring to kinda stick. Iv also noticed its more prone to juttering when the focus ring is set to around infinity.

Im not overyly worried about it, but if its a sign of a larger issue ill return it while I can. Iv also never owned lens quite like this, and im unsure what to expect - so any advice would be great ?

I just tried mine. My zoom ring stays smooth but I did notice when pointed down my focus ring did make a noise it didn't make when straight or pointed up. It doesn't sound too serious to me but I am a little concerned now if it's not normal.

[TooManyShots]

After spent over 5 hours cover all the fields of yesterday bike race (shot over 2k shots), here is what I can conclude about the Sigma. AF speed and accuracy are similar to 27-70L. Certainly, it didn't wow me. Maybe I am demanding too much with the way I shoot (literally "picking" out riders from a speedy peleton at 26mph as riders zipping by). To nail the focus, the AF would literally NEED to lock onto the subject in 1 sec. It does the job. There were times I did wonder how in the world the lens could miss the focus. It was cloudy and overcast yesterday all day. I did A LOT of panning shots. I am happy with the panning shot result. I have many keepers. The lens is sharp enough. IQ is so-so when adding a converter on it. Also, shooting at anything faster than F4, the DOF is pretty thin on this lens. At f3.5, I could barely get the second rider in focus.

[kaydawgy]

Just picked mine up 2 weeks ago. Loving every second of it, and also loving the extra $1,100 in my pocket I saved NOT buying Canons. Quick question though, do ya'll use that extra attachment on the lens hood for those using crop cameras?? I'm using this on a 7d and kinda find it annoying that I can't store the hood on backwards when stuffing it in my backpack.............or maybe I'm just doing it wrong ;)

[dr_devious]

Just picked mine up 2 weeks ago. Loving every second of it, and also loving the extra $1,100 in my pocket I saved NOT buying Canons. Quick question though, do ya'll use that extra attachment on the lens hood for those using crop cameras?? I'm using this on a 7d and kinda find it annoying that I can't store the hood on backwards when stuffing it in my backpack.............or maybe I'm just doing it wrong ;)

I didn't notice a difference in my shots with or without that extra ring so I put it back in the box...

[Maurice A.]

The only time I use the ring is on it`s own at the arena to rest against the glass.It allows you to get very close to the glass and provides protection :).

[Sirrith]

Just wondering, do these lenses have all new finish? Or do some of the older copies come with the mixed finish (i.e. sparkly zoom/focus ring, matte everything else)?

[dr_devious]

The only time I use the ring is on it`s own at the arena to rest against the glass.It allows you to get very close to the glass and provides protection :).

Oh! Good idea and use for it!

[TooManyShots]

Just wondering, do these lenses have all new finish? Or do some of the older copies come with the mixed finish (i.e. sparkly zoom/focus ring, matte everything else)?


I believe the tripod ring, focus and zoom rings are all the old finish.

[Sirrith]

I believe the tripod ring, focus and zoom rings are all the old finish.

Oh ok. Thats a shame... Ah well :) thanks!

[TooManyShots]

Oh ok. Thats a shame... Ah well :) thanks!


I am sure you can have them replaced as part of the warranty.

[WilsonC]

Just wondering, do these lenses have all new finish? Or do some of the older copies come with the mixed finish (i.e. sparkly zoom/focus ring, matte everything else)?

From what I've read, the parts on this lens that have the old finish are metal. While the Matte finished parts are a made from heavy duty plastic. I've never held one, so can't confirm this.

[Sirrith]

From what I've read, the parts on this lens that have the old finish are metal. While the Matte finished parts are a made from heavy duty plastic. I've never held one, so can't confirm this.

I'm not so sure about that, because the back section of the barrel between the lens mount and the focus ring is meant to be metal, but I'm pretty sure that has the new finish.

[TooManyShots]

Well, I am sorry but I tried to like this lens but the AF accuracy isn't working with AI servo mode when you are trying to track selective subjects in a sequence. I just tested the lens in a bike race. I wasn't even shooting the top amateur riders. Just beginners. Here is what is happening. Like the lens was going through an identity crisis. First rider was in focus. Then, to the second rider. Now, a rider in the middle of the field would miss the focus. The last rider would kind of nailing the focus. When you look at the shot at 100%, it is blurry. The AI servo AF is fine tracking a single subject, no wonder why my panning shots look so good. Basically, the lens needs time to lock focus (2sec maybe). That's dog ass slow. Once the focus is acquired, it has no problem produce sharp shot. I even allowed at least 1 sec for the lens to lock focus.

Shooting a stationary subject the lens is awesome. When you have multiple subjects moving all around and you are trying to track them, you just don't get much keepers. The lens is going back tomorrow.