Sigma 70-200 2.8 or a magic drainpipe!

Hi,

I have a Sigma 70-200 2.8 which I am happy with but have been offered a Canon 80-200 2.8 L (a.k.a. magic drainpipe) for a decent price. I can't afford to keep both so the question is which should I go for...

As far as I see:
Canon
Positives- Outstanding colour and image quality
Negatives- AF speed? Older and no longer widely repairable

Sigma
Positives- Much newer (more reliable?), APO and DG for digital
Negatives- Image quality poorer?

I was struggling to come up with negatives for the Sigma which maybe makes up my mind before even posting this...but does anyone have an opinion either way? Any reason to change to the Canon?

I enjoy walking and use this mostly for just taking shots of wildlife I come across so I don't need anything fancy and definitely can't afford a current 70-200 2.8 (IS or non-IS) .

Thanks,


Steve

If it ain't broke don't fix it, sounds like your not having any issues with the Sigma and you've answered yourself

I highly doubt you'd find any difference in noticeable image quality between the 80-200 and Sigma 70-200.

Yep, sort of how I was starting to think...I just wasn't sure if the Canon would somehow turn me into David Bailey overnight

It is on its way though so expect to see one or the other in the FS forum in the near future....


Steve

Why not buy the drainpipe, try it, and sell whichever lens you like least?

I'd check and see what the Magic Drainpipes are getting on eBay before I thought of buying it. It is older technology.

I just sold a Sigma 70-200 2.8 (older, non-DG model), and replaced it with a 70-200 f/2.8L, and the Sigma was actually sharper. Perhaps mine was a very sharp copy, but if you're happy with your Sigma, I say keep it. Also, if you ever drop/damage the 80-200 2.8, or it fails for some reason, you may not be able to get parts for it.

Okay I definitely see the way this is going and I think that as Pete-eos said I answered my own question in the first post. I will be picking the Canon up later this week and will try them together but don't be too surprised to see one for sale.....

Thanks for your opinions everyone!

Steve

Here's a question.

If you can afford to have both in ownership at the same time, to test them side by side, why can't you afford to sell both and get a new(er) 70-200 2.8L?

keep the sigma - i dont see any real advantages to the magic drainpipe. im sure someone will come along and be like "but the drainpipes better, its made by canon", but that just shows how ignorant they are.

I suspect any difference will make no difference overall ... I doubt the Canon is better. At best it'll be swings and roundabouts. I'd keep the Sigma. I liked mine.

cdifoto wrote in post #2972201
Here's a question.

If you can afford to have both in ownership at the same time, to test them side by side, why can't you afford to sell both and get a new(er) 70-200 2.8L?

To be honest the 70-200 2.8L would probably be wasted on me. I don't think that the pictures I take would really improve by sufficient to justify the extra cost. Sad to say that although I really enjoy photography I would not rate my ability at anything above average .

I can afford to have them both at the same time but if I was to keep them then the end of the month could be tricky!! If it was how I made my living then I would make do and get the best I possibly could but at the moment I go for a compromise which lets me do other things as well.

Cheers,

Steve

asylumxl wrote in post #2972279
keep the sigma - i dont see any real advantages to the magic drainpipe. im sure someone will come along and be like "but the drainpipes better, its made by canon", but that just shows how ignorant they are.

I agree with you there but I am a confirmed Sigma addict. I wonder if it makes me halfway to Noink by not buying Canon lenses?


Steve

condyk wrote in post #2972323
I suspect any difference will make no difference overall ... I doubt the Canon is better. At best it'll be swings and roundabouts. I'd keep the Sigma. I liked mine.

Thanks Dave, that is probably the way that I will end up going because I really do like my Sigma (and I would have a 10mm gap between the 17-70 and the Canon which would never do ).


Steve

perfect_pixel wrote in post #2972330
To be honest the 70-200 2.8L would probably be wasted on me.

Everything in my gear bag is wasted on me.