sigma 120-300 vs canon 70-200ii at 120-200

Hi there

I have been wrestling with a dilemma of mine in regards to these two lenses.

I KNOW that they are different tools for different types of photography (partially at least)

and the fact that the 120-300 is more than twice the weight of the canon is not lost on me - or my shoulders/neck etc...

but I am still partially enthralled by the sigma

equally i have always wanted the 70-200 ii - though at the time that i bought the 70-200 f4is it was because that it was described as being its match in everything except for f2.8... so i am also enthralled by that one (granted there are others who remark that the 70-200 ii is much better than the f4is).

anyway, i would use either one with appropriate ETs: canon for canon and sigma for sigma - both the 1.4 and the 2.0 versions.

I guess I was wondering if the 120-300 can match or come close to the 70-200 in its overlap regions.

if this matters, though it shouldn't, i don't have a sell any lens to buy the above ones...so for the long journeys/hikes etc when i want to cut down on weight - I can still use the 70-200 f4is.

thanks for any relevant input.

I own a Sigma 120-300, a Canon 70-200 2.8 IS, and two 70-200 F4 IS lenses. I also have the Canon 1.4x and 2x extenders.

Some thoughts...

The Sigma is by far the sharpest. Razor sharp throughout the entire range at 2.8. Fantastic lens. Great AF. Downside? It's heavy, and there is no IS unless you want to upgrade ($$). If you plan to carry this for a long time, start lifting weights (or the lens). I shoot all handheld. I can be very steady, but I have to keep an eye on my shutter speed to make sure I'm not introducing motion blur. Also, you can't go wider than 120, which I sometimes miss. The Sigma plays nice with the 1.4x and is still very sharp, though I think it had trouble focusing with the 2x.

The Canon 70-200 2.8 IS is a great tool. Lovely bokeh, good range of focal lengths. Not too heavy. However, it is not as sharp with extenders as the F4 IS nor the Sigma. I use the F4 IS with the 1.4x all the time, and it's still sharp and clear. Haven't used the 2x a long while because things start to look soft on all lenses.

If you do need the reach and do need extenders and don't mind the weight, go for the Sigma. You've already got 70-200 covered well with your F4 if you need it.

Recent albums...

Symphonicity, Virginia Beach - 35 and 120-300
Fairfax Symphony Orchestra - 120-300
UNC Wind Ensemble Rehearsal - 70-200 F2.8 IS
My Funny Valentine, trumpet solo (video) - 70-200 F4 IS

Not familiar with the Sigma lens, but I can tell you there is quite a difference between the Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS original lens and the Mark II version.