Soon to be: Sigma 120-300mm F2.8 EX DG APO HSM vs. Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8 L IS II USM

I am doing this for my blog and will post my finding soon enough (read first week of january or so) I was just seeing if anyone wanted me to add things to the review. before I start tomorrow.

Im not an authority on lens reviews neither do I use charts nor the terms that accompany the technical aspects of photography. I have however been photographing since before Canon released its first EF 70-200mm 2.8 L zoom in 1995. I had one for more than 10 years. When they released the first iteration of the 70-200 2.8 with IS in 2001 it did not seem like a step forward, it was a lens that in my opinion and many others not as sharp as the previous one, also heavier as it contained more glass. I had to look elsewhere for a good replacement, which I found in the Sigma.

I will be testing the lenses with a Canon Eos 1d Mark IV, Canons most advanced camera as of January 2011. Also the camera with which I will be working with the two lenses this year. I.e the test. Also the test will be done on my Benbo Tripod with a Manfrotto head. Not the Monopod that I use while working, all so that each lens will have the same angle. Any photos of the lenses and camera are done with my Eos 1Ds MkII and a modified for Nikon mount Zeiss .zf 50mm MP. The place of the test will be done at Valle Romano Golf and Resort. The processing will be done in the latest version of Apple Aperture.

I will be looking hardest at the overlapping FOL (FOV x1.3mm), such as 120mm (156) 150mm (195) and 200mm (260). Also independently ill be looking at 70mm (91mm) and 300mm (390).

Below you will find jpegs at 50% and a compression of 10.

I mainly do this test for myself so that I can choose lens for occasion,
* Af Accuracy on a non -mobile object
* Tracking on a slow moving object
* Metering (even though I shoot in raw Im interested how much flare can throw the cameras metering to the left or right.)
* Sun flare
* Minimum focus distance and maximum focus distance
* Center sharpness ( should not be a problem as the camera is 1.3 )

The Canon MKII will win in everything except at 300mm f2.8

Its a good thing i posted here first, cos if there is no interest in a photo forum, just imagine the normal population.... scrapped the idea!

zincozinco wrote in post #11539729
Its a good thing i posted here first, cos if there is no interest in a photo forum, just imagine the normal population.... scrapped the idea!

Where did you get that idea from?
I bet many are interested, including myself. Not answering a thread doesn't mean we don't care about it at all.
I am sure if you post your review, with pictures, MANY will join, comment and appreciate. Again, including myself.
It's just not very usual to enter a thread announcing something will be done... at least for myself...
but it if makes you feel your work will be appreciated, so here it goes:

I'm really interested in this comparison and thank you for spending your time and putting effort on doing it. I did a few lens reviews and know how hard, demanding and even sometimes boring it can be. So be sure to post it (or the link for it) here because I am sure many as myself will be waiting

Hehe ok since you ask so politely... Ill just pray for the rain gods to stop the havoc cos i wont do weathersealing

I'd be more interested when the new Sigma 120-300mm 2.8 OS comes out in the spring

I am also interested in the 120-300mm (I don't plan on getting it soon, but down the road)
Plus, there isn't too many reviews on the 120-300

atc wrote in post #11542744
I am also interested in the 120-300mm (I don't plan on getting it soon, but down the road)
Plus, there isn't too many reviews on the 120-300

Here's a couple , I think LightRules also reviewed it.

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=917953

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=150405

and the lens archive

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=277729

zincozinco wrote in post #11539729
Its a good thing i posted here first, cos if there is no interest in a photo forum, just imagine the normal population.... scrapped the idea!

I figure the 70-200 would destroy the 130-300 up to 200mm, and the 120-300 would make the 70-200 non-existent > 200mm So yeah probably doesn't need to be done.

hi guys... first post on the forum, but of course a long time lurker. this thread kinda demanded my attention, as I own both the original EF 70-200 2.8L (non-IS), the ancient EF 100-300 f5.6L (my first EF tele zoom, from when I bought my first EOS-1 film camera back in the early '90s) and the first gen Sigma 120-300 2.8EX (now about 3 years old itself).

I performed a bit of comparison testing a couple months ago to see how the 3 compared. I know that the original 70-200 is no match for the latest IS equipped version, but considering that it is still in production, it should still be more than competitive with the alternatives from sigma/tokina etc.

to make a long story short, you shouldn't count the sigma 120-300 EX out against any of the 70-200L lenses. in my testing, the EX defeated my non-IS 70-200 at all focal lengths and aperture combinations tested on my 7D (I went so far as to focus manually via the LCD on tripod for the tests), which has a nasty ability to find every flaw a given lens has to offer. the old 100-300L (which produced some truly amazing images back in the film days) was completely annihilated.

honestly, the 120-300 did so well against the 70-200L that if it were not for the sigma's significantly greater weight and bulk, I would prefer to give it permanent space in my camera bag, instead of only bringing it when I know I need the extra reach and am also toting a monopod. the 70-200 is much easier to handhold for long periods.