70-200 Dilemma

Get the Sigma f/2.8 and good value for money IMO

I agree on the Siggie f2.8, it's on my want list till I can afford a 70-200 2.8 IS. 2.8 is always better than f4 in my opinion.

Hello,

dajomel wrote in post #1999958
Good Morning/Afternoon/Even​ing.

Many apologies if this questions has been asked before or something similar. Fairly new to the Forum and have done a search but maybe I'm a muppet and not searching right.

Anyway, my dilemma is that there seems to be a few 70-200 lenses on the market and I'm trying to decide which would be best value for money. Now before anyone immediately thinks the 2.8L IS USM then SORRY but not enough notes for that one.

The three I have picked out are:
Sigma 70-200 f2.8 EX DG APO Macro HSM £528
Canon 70-200 f4L USM £399
Canon 70-200 f2.8L USM £730

Now, from reading the many excellent posts on the forum the 70-200 can be used in portraiture (my main use) as well as giving obvious length in zoom when necessary for other needs. Would the extra stop of the 2.8 make a whole lot of difference in "normal" environments (mix of generally well lit indoor and some outdoor)? (hate the phrase "normal" but can't think of better right now) Take into consideration that a Speedlight will be used most of the time as well.
Curious about the Sigma and the Canon f4 as it would allow me to get a 50 f1.4 as well for the same price as the Canon f2.8.

Many thanks in advance to anyone who gives a moment of time to reply.

We have both the EF 70-200mm f/4L USM and the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM. I take the small lens with me on business trips and vacations because it's small and light, but we do all of our portrait work with the f/2.8L IS. I can't imagine not having IS since we shoot portraits hand-held.

Remember, people outside in bright sunlight have dark shadows under their eyes and tend to squint a lot. For good outdoor portraits, you typically have to get people out of the sun, which means less light. That's where IS comes in handy. We often shoot couples at f/5.6, ISO 100, at 1/125s in the shade. The results in these conditions without IS or a tripod are not great.

If you will be doing most of your portrait work with big studio strobes, this may not apply.

We purchased the 70-200mm f/4L because I did not think we would need the big f/2.8L IS. Now we have both! If you prefer not to eventually end up with both, my recommendation is that you buy the f/2.8L IS first.

The 70-200 f/4 IS will be out soon! Hold out for that one!!

Sigma f2.8 - add 1.4xTC or 2xTC and still autofocus.
Canon f4 - add 1.4xTC and still autofocus.

I have never heard of anyone saying "I should have bought the f/4 lens over the f/2.8 cause it's just too darn fast". I had the f/4 and it was great but...I so often said "Darn, this f/4 is too slow for alot of situations, especially indoors". But the weight difference is huge and you might be the type that is OK missing a shot due to poor light and not needing a chiropracter after a day slugging around a f/2.8. All 3 are superb, however.

Right. After sitting here and thinking that I would go for the Canon f/4 I have now decided that the Sigma f2.8 may be better suited to me.

I have been reading everybodys comments on here, thank you all for posting, as well as various other threads and it seems that the extra stop will be a real bonus to have. I think that going for the Sigma will be a good choice and at that price will allow me to get 50 1.8 or maybe at a puch the 50 1.4 or 85 1.8.

Think that I will have to go this route at the moment until I have the available funds to treat myself and get the 70-200 f2.8L IS.

I am actually new to DSLR and am planning on purchasing the following, hence budgeting:
30D
EF-S 10-22
EF 24-105 f4L IS
EF 50 or 85
70-200 (prob Sigma now)
430ex (580 if I can stretch things)
2x2Gb card

I'm hoping that a setup like that will be good to get me going and cover a good range of lengths.

Thanks

well dont think that the sigma isnt good just cause its black and dosent have an L on her name .. true that the canon is better (consedering that it has IS and its faster focusing wich is good when u thake photos to sports ) still acording to a lot of ppl the sigma is a superb lens

im pretty sure that u will be really happy having her


( well why am i even thalking here im no lens expert xD, oh well at least its imo

Well idecided on the Sigma after much debate.I too will be shooting Paintball and thought the extra stop would com in handy especially indoors.I will let you know when it arrives today.

Seems I am too late, but my philosphy is either buy the best (you will always want to upgrade otherwise) or buy the most cost effective cheap item, being aware that will definately upgrade when the time is suitable.

Throwing in a darkhorse - Tokina ATX 828 PRO 70-200 F2.8

I am using the Sigma for shooting paintball and love the shots I get. I just recently changed over to this and have very little complaints about it. The black coating comes off very easy and the focus dial is a bit stiff (though it has gotten better with time).