70-200L 2.8 is or Sigma 70-200 2.8 + Bigma. Same price.

If you had the choice between buying a canon 70-200 2.8L IS lens or a sigma 70-200 2.8 and a sigma 50-500, what would you do? and why? Thanks

from B&H

Canon 70-200 2.8L IS - $1699.95
or
Sigma 70-200 2.8 and a Sigma 50-500 f/4-6.3 - $1758.00

I went with the IS. Mostly because I don't do the super-tele end and rarely use a tripod.

If you need to get out to 500mm the Bigma is the best way to do it for around a grand from everything I've seen and read.

EDIT: But then I also bought mine used and saved $200 + shipping over the B&H price so the difference would be ~ $300 from what I paid.

If you need IS... then the first option. If you need a long lens... the 2nd option. The IS lens is a great lens, I use it often for candids at weddings, but for nothing else really.

Without knowing what you do with your camera our advice isn't going to be all that helpful.

I shoot a little bit of everything. By summer I'd like to get a longer lens for outdoor sports and some wildlife. I guess by what i just said, the second choice would probobly be better.