70-200l f/4 Canon vs. 70-200 2.8 Sigma

I'm trying to solve a delima I'm having here. My budget for a 70-200 lens is 750ish - so the canon 70-200 2.8 is waaay out. I have read good reviews on the Sigma but the canon is, well, canon and an L.

I'm hoping to start second shooting with some local wedding pros in the future so it would be for that application.

So the question is - Do I get the Sigma for the 2.8? Or do I go with the Canon, even though it's only a f/4, because it's a L and (presumably) better IQ?

Any thought's would be appreciated.

do a search on this topic, there are loads of threads on sigma 2.8 vs 70-200 F4L... i chose the F4, but depending on what you want to photograph you may want to go for the 2.8!

The 70-200 f4 is one of the sharpest 7x-2xx zooms out, probably the sharpest. My Sigma 70-200 2.8 stopped down to f4 is DAMN sharp. Heck, at 2.8 it's very very usable. You've got to decide if you need 2.8 and are willing to spend a little extra for it. Also, the Sigma comes with a tripod collar and fits the "L standard" 77mm filter.

Are you able to compare the two, side by side? The Sigma gives you an extra stop, very useful in poor light. The Canon gives up a stop, but has the edge in the weight and size department, and is close to $200 less then the Sigma.

I have the Canon 70-200 f4. I love it to death, its very sharp and the colors it gives are amazing. With that being said; When shooting indoors or low light situations such as in weddings you are more than likely going to need the extra stop. I struggle with the canon in these situations and always wish I had another stop or two. Even at 2.8 you will run into some ticky situations without flash.

That's what I'm afraid of (needing the extra stop). Is it worth giving up the focus speed and IQ of the Canon though? I have read that the Sigma is very close to the Canon, but...? I'm just worrying I guess.

Got the Sigma, stop worrying! Awesome piece of glass. (If not long enough now)...

simoncwr wrote in post #2633602
Got the Sigma, stop worrying! Awesome piece of glass. (If not long enough now)...

I'm in a similar situation as NWShooter, but I'd be VERY interested in a side-by-side comparo of the Sigma 70-200 /2.8 vs. the Canon 70-200 /2.8.

I can't speak to the Sigma, but the 70-200mm F4/L is amazing not just from sharpness, but the colors are bright.

I don't have either, but am anticipating having to make the same decision soon.. Right now I'm leaning either to the Sigma, or saving for the Canon 2.8L.

I haven't owned any of these. I'm looking to purchase in the near future also. The Canon f2.8 is out of my price range for a lens. Most likely I'll be getting the Sigma for the extra stop. I'm not really a name brand player anyways.

www.pbase.com/lightrul​es for comparos

Mr. Clean wrote in post #2634368
www.pbase.com/lightrul​es for comparos

Thanks.

I had both and liked both but preferred the 2.8 Sigma overall. Now I would get the IS L 4.0.

condyk wrote in post #2635383
I had both and liked both but preferred the 2.8 Sigma overall. Now I would get the IS L 4.0.

first jojo and now you **sigh**.... .

ed rader