Sigma 70-200 2.8 EX APO IF HSM

Sigma 70-200 2.8 EX APO IF HSM

I think this is going to be my next lens purchase but before I pull the trigger I would not mind some feedback on the lens.

I know there are going to be people telling me to get the Canon lens but that is not at all possible, especially since the Sigma is nearly half the price.

Does anybody have any first had experience with this lens?

What do you think about it?

Is there something else in this price range that is equal to or better than the Sigma?

I have read a lot of very positive comments about this lens. Many have said that this is one of the best zooms that Sigma makes. If you know that you won't need the 2.8 then you could consider the Canon 70-200L f4 but I'd rather have the faster lens.

I own it and I am one of those that would say it is the best zoom lens that Sigma makes.

It is also a superb zoom lens by all acoounts. I have more expensive lenses,. Canon and Sigma alike,. but this lens is tops in my kit.

I debated this lens against the Canon 70-200mm f/4 which is similarly priced (the Sigma can be had for about $550. with some shopping) but I truly NEEDED the f/2.8 for photos I take in a dark theatre with no flash.

Check my gallery below and take a look at the Fashion Show collection,. that was the 70-200mm f/2.8

I WOULD NOT have been able to get thos shots without that lens.

The Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 EX HSM is my most used lens in my bag. It is a fantastic lens. I have several photos in this gallery that were shot with this lens. I also have a full resolution image from the 10D and Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 EX HSM. You can see it here. The shot was 1/200 at f/2.8 and ISO 100.

I also own this lens, and tested it side by side against the Canon 70-200 2.8 L in studio, under controlled conditions. Myself and a coworker could not distinguish between the two, they were that close. They do have minor differences, such as one is slightly warmer than the other (don't remember which was which). As I needed a 2.8 lens and plan to use it there, I tested at that aperture as well as closed down, and again both the Canon and Sigma lenses were pretty much equal to each other.

I also compared focus speed, noise, and hunt between the two. Again, they were pretty much equal, though the Sigma is a bit louder. Of course, since the Canon lenses are pretty much silent, any sound is louder compared to Canon's USM. In a moderately lit office, they both hunted about the same, and both found focus about the same. Performance, build, and optically, they really are just about equals. The one performance difference is that the Canon focus down to 5 feet, the Sigma only to 6 feet.

The big differences are in function. The Canon lens zooms from right to left, while the Sigma zooms from left to right (a la Nikon). One difference that I think is slightly in favor of the Sigma is the zoom ring / focus ring layout. On the Canon, the zoom ring is fairly large, while the focus ring is a bit smaller. On the Sigma, the zoom ring is plenty big, while the focus ring is not only bigger, but it also sits closer to the zoom ring, making it easier / quicker to use, and if you are somewhat coordinated you could actually turn both at the same time with just one hand. The rings on the Canon are a bit more spread out, making that a little more difficult. In the end, probably not really that big of a difference. And finally, on the Sigma, the knob for loosening / tightening the tripod colar sits 90* away from the foot itself, where as on the Canon the knob and foot are side by side. This means instead of one protrusion (the foot) banging your knuckles or taking up room in your bag, on the Sigma, you have two.

But then, it is $500+ less...

Thanks for all of your replies, you have defenitely made my decision making a lot easier.

I think maybe I was a bit premature to be asking this question since I am not going to prchase a new lens for a little while but I do like having my ducks in a row.

Currently I own a Sigma 24-70 2.8 EX DG DF and am very happy with it but then again, I am not at a level of photagrphy where I could recognize a difference I am sure.

Littlebike....I too asked this question on this forum about a month ago. Thanks to an excellent number of replies (all positive ones, I might add ) I took the plunge and bought this lens. I have never regretted it. I have, in fact, just returned this evening from my son's soccer tournament in Sunderland. I soley used this lens for all my shots. The vast majority of all my shots were very sharp and well exposed on my Canon D60 using continuous autofocus. Using single shot autofocus ALL my shots were very sharp. The 2.8 aperture blurs backgrounds for portraits beautifully, and is a valuable aid in low light. Well worth the money. If you give me your e mail address I'll gladly send you some resized images that I took today.

PS...Special thanks to CyberDene Systems and Bluebomberx for their help and examples, which was a major factor in choosing this lens. Cheers Guys!

I had the Sigma 70-200 f2.8. I took some excellent photos with it. I ended up exchanging it for a Canon 70-200 f/4L, mainly because of the extra-f/stop-to-weight ratio. I would not hesitate to recommend that lens though. I have heard people talk about Canon USM focusing being faster or quiter etc. I did not find that to be the case.

I have been using this lens for several months, and it generally gives me good pictures. But one thing I noticed is that the picture is less sharp at the tele end with wide open. It gets sharp once I stop down to f4.

When I bought this lens, I was not used to use heavy lens, so I produced lots of blurry pictures. Recently I got a monopod, and it helps a lot taking sharper images. It also helps carrying this lens attached to 10D for long time. However, it is still heavy for me, I am thinking to trade it in for Canon 70-200 4L, but I see some people with Canon 4L having focusing problem, so I cannot decide yet.

Anyway, if you use it with mono/tripod, this is a great lens for the money.

Thanks

The weight question is of course relative.

My other "Most used" lens would be the Sigma 50-500mm! Now THAT is a HEAVY lens!

There was actually a time where it was the only lens I owned!

So when the 70-200mm arrived,. it seemd very light to me