70-200 2.8 EX HSM. Sigma, Its GOOD. Want proof?

The question is always asked.

How does the 70-200 EX Sigma stack up against the 70-200 Canon IS?

Well we have people who swear the Canon IS is a much better lens because it is much more expensive and IS is an essential tool if you want sharp pics, Utter Baloney!

I am pleased to have found the work of Fred Vnoucek, who has a portfolio of sublime Nature Photographs on the photonet website.

These pics are taken in various spots around the world. Some pretty horrendous spots in fact, that only a solidly constructed lens would survive.

And what lenses does Fred use? Well these photographs where taken with the 28-70 2.8 EX Sigma the 70-200 2.8 EX Sigma and the 50-500 EX Sigma.

This is the definitive proof that in the hands of an expert photographer the Sigma is the equal to any other lens in its class, Canon included, and that IS is just a sometimes handy, overated, unessesary expense.

I challenge any of the people on this site that are "L" glass vociferous owners that insist nothing can equal "L" (we all know who they are!) to put up work from their OWN lenses that equals or is better than Freds work with the Sigmas

SPEAK NOW OR FOREVER HOLD YOUR PEACE!

When you open the link, click on any photo that catches your eye, (there will be plenty!) and a larger image will come up with lens and camera used for that photo. attached

http://www.photo.net …nclude=all&user​_id=552657

I'M WAITING! This is not a flame. It is a resolution. (Pun intended!)

Fantastic!

These are so wonderfull,. a collection of images that I could only dream of. Absolutely world class.

Thanks for the link.

Your point is a good one as well (though perhaps a trifle less than diplomatic? )

There are good, great, and crappy lenses made by a lot of manufacturers. Those that have found Canon's finest may have good reasons and personal experience that supports the "L" only mindset. The fact is if they can afford it,. then that is wonderfull because they probably can't go wrong by using it.

However, I too am a happy Sigma owner. So I know of what you speak,.. and I know that some are missing out on the quality and bargain that Sigma EX lenses represent.

But for us downtrodden EX owners, ...here is a little perspective.

The truth is that just like anyone manufacturer, Sigma makes some damn crappy lenses too... we all know this.

YES many of them are fantastic!
However,. the entire "EX" line,. the lenses I love so much,. are VERY NEW.

The EX line was only introduced in 2000-2001!

Prior to that ALL sigma lenses were more "bargains".

I had the misfortune of tryng the earlier "Non EX" + "Non HSM" version of my 500mm f/4.5 EX prior to getting the EX version,. and this huge lens with the exact same "specs" as the newer EX version and was at the time of manufacture Sigma's 2nd highest priced lens, was pure JUNK! ..it was so bad that I was petrified to take the gamble on the new EX vesion. This was Sigma's finest lens and it was crap.

It is inconceivable the difference in the EX version! On paper these two versions look like the same lens,. when in fact there is no way to compare them.

If this old Sigma is the Sigma that many know,. I can not blame them for thinking that they are all junk.

So,.. anyone who has been in this business or hobby that has a memory or experience of Sigma lenses, may have very good reason to think that Sigma can't compare to "L"

Give Sigma a second look if you can,. it is worth it.

I use primary Sigma and also a 70-210f2.8 the older version, please look at www.doorhof.nl and you see alot of shots with this lens. I can't imagine the Canon beating this.
I see a staggering difference when I use another lens so almost constat the 70-210 is mounted .

Greetings,
Frank

CDS, for the first time in months I have to STRONGLY disagree with you. My Sigma 70-210 f/2.8 APO is close to eight years old and it takes tack sharp pictures, equal to those you spoke of, and equal to those posted by Canon users with the same length zoom lens.
When I get it back from being rechipped I will prove it. Either wait until then or I will have to scan some old Elan II pics

TimNYC,

I did not mean it quite that way,.

I just re-read my post and I see why you would think that,. in fact,. that is exactly what I said

Doh!!!

But that isn't really what I meant!

Suffice it to say,. Sigma HAS made vast improvements to there higher end offerings with the introduction of HSM focus motors and the EX series.

In addition, by doing so they have created a very discernable line of excellent lense,. like the "L" lenses they are immediately recognizable by there EX tag,.. (well not so recognizable as an all white lens )

What I was TRYING to say, (but I admit I failed) is that prior to the EX line and Sigma's self instituted overhaul of there pricier optics,. it would be easy to have a 'dog" of a lens and feel that all Sigmas were created equal as there was no clear dilineation between the standard lens and the better lens.
(other than price, and as was the case with the $3,400.00 500mm even price was no guarantee)


That at least was one point I should have made clearer,.. what took me sooo far off track was the extreme difference between the EX version of the very pricey 500mm f/4.5 Vs. the old "APO" version. Buy "focusing" on that issue I ended up "dogging" all the old Sigmas,. and that was not my intention.

//read what mean not what I type lol

I have been an admirer of J.A.F.'s work for months now and am fully aware that he uses the "old" 70-210mm NON-EX, NON-HSM... so I do know what you mean about that lens in particular.


Still,. would love to see some of your samples

It wasn't meant to be too diplomatic, CDS. Some of the comments by 'L' owners regarding Sigma EX have been rather scathing and they should be able to handle it!

As a matter of fact I am rather amazed at "The Silence of the 'L'ambs!" in the face of this stunning evidence. (Heh Heh Heh!)

But hey! I look so much cooler walking around with my white lenses. I don't actually take the pictures, I just walk around and aim it alot. And man, I look so cool doing it! People walk up and bow before me with complete lens envy. I even do the "sign of the lens" over their heads so they will truly feel the power of stabilization.

Pose for me Clariiiiiiise! I'll take your pikchah with some fahvah beans.... slslslslslslslslslslsl​slsllslslssllslp!

If that 70-200L purchase from Dell doesn't pan out, I will seriously look into this lens. It's only about a grand less expensive than the canon IS rival (at normal prices).

David

Sign of the lens? How do you do that then?
Very curious.

Susan

I painted my Sigma 70-210 f2.8 Apo white .
I couldn't stand it being black.

Greetings,
Frank

Ah, well, you have to be an L user first, to post such privileged information here would be an open invitation to all those low life sigma users to start imitating L owners by practicing the sign.
Now what would the world come to if that where to happen. Shocking concept

(I'm an L owner who is planning to buy a sigma 70-200 F2.8EX )

Erin wrote:
The question is always asked.


http://www.photo.net …nclude=all&user​_id=552657

I had the 70-200mm EX f/2.8 and it was well worth the money. Fred's photos are super. Does he have any taken with a digital camera using the same lens?

I'm not questioning Sigma performance but I am questioning this testing methodology. How can you judge a lens based on resized images? Even shoddy lenses look good when the picture is resized down to a fraction of the original size and displayed at approx 100 dpi.

Another "L" owner here.
Are the "L"-lenses great lenses? I think so. Most of my shots are crispy and tack sharp.
Are Sigma great lenses? Most likely and they are getting better.
The pictures in the mentioned gallery are great. Would they have been of a better quality when taken with "L"glass? We will never know.

There is a variety of factors that will decide what lens is best for you. Technical quality is just one of them. Budget, expectations and your spouses mood after seiing another bill are a few more.

BTW: I also have Sigma: 15-30 (love it) and 170-500 (not convinced yet).

Good to see some of you 'L' owners coming out of shock!

I have used company owned 'L's and know from personal experience that that they are GOOD too! but they now have some serious competition. If they fit into your budgeting system fine, as henkbos points out.

Here in New Zealand, Canon has dropped the price on 'L' by about 20% over the last 18 months, to compete with the opposition Not because they love Kiwis, just that they were REALLY shafting us before!

Another 3 years will be needed to establish the Sigma EXs real place, as it is only a very recent development, as CDS pointed out earlier in the thread.

Just that Fred Vnoucek is an EX Sigma pioneer at the top level at this stage of the game. A travelling photographer, not a website traveller like we all are to differing degrees.

Mig82, Have a look at the crouching Leopard pic in the Terra Africa folder, take it up to 'largest' size (scanned from slide remember) visualise all the missing pixels replaced, or a projection direct from the orginal slide. If someone said 'L' glass you would say "Of course!"

Soon enough you will be practicing the SIGMA SIGNS
1) Middle finger raised to snobby "L" owners
or, for the more timid Sigma owners, 2) Thumb to nose, tongue out, pointing to actual money still in the wallet

We welcome all with an open mind

*yes, this was intended to be SOMEWHAT tongue in cheek*