sigma 70-200 f\2.8 0r the bigma?

Im looking to buy either the Sigma 50-500 or buy the sigma 70-200 2.8 and get the tele-con. to go with 70-200 They would be use for wildlife, childrens football, baseball, etc. Im wondering which would be the better way to go? Thanks for any respnoses.

Hmmmm hard choice, the f/2.8 will probably be more versatile for the childrens football but won't do the wildlife or baseball so well.

Maybe wait and see what the new new OS Sigma's coming out in April are like. Or maybe look at the 100-300 f/4 + TC. Providingg your shooting in day light you have f/4 across the range and a 420mm f/5.6 for wildlife...

Just my opinion and it is worth exactly what you paid for it. I have the 1.4 Sigma and the 70-200 f2.8 and I bought the 70-200 used for 600.00 and it works flawlessly. I am ordering the 120-400 with OS as I will mainly use it outside anyway and if I need to move inside I have the f2.8 70-200. About 850.00 for the 120-400 and 600.00 for the used 70-200 and for approx 1250.00 I have both lenses ready to go and I am pleased with the IQ of the Sigma lenses so far.

Yeah true, I like the versitility the 2.8 would give me, but i like the reach the 50- 500 would give too. 90% of the time would be in good daylight, I would like to get out and shoot some eagles and hawks and any other wildlife I can find to shoot pictures of when Im out. Thats why I was thinking of adding a TC to the 2.8 yes i would lose a couple f\stops as long as i could still get good quality shots that would do me well also.

Sounds to me like you are thinking it through quite well. There are so many alternatives. I tried the 2.0 TC and for me at least the loss of IQ was just too much to make it worthwhile. I honestly have to really peep to see any difference with the 1.4 sigma however.

I have both of the sigma lenses. I would go Bigma first....much more versatile....I got the 2.8 for reach in doors. I mainly shoot the bigma if i'm outside.....I've also used both with a 2x extender....mostly moon shots. My vote is Bigma first...

had them both sold the bigma kept the 70-200 2.8 great lens by thw way. never did like the bigma much image quality it was good but at 500mm really needed a tripod or at least a mono pod always had a lot of shake . needed a lot of light to get good shots f6.3 just didnt cut it for me so ended up with 120-3oo sigma 2.8 with 1.4 tele on f4 so much better than the bigma 6.3 plus bigma doesnt auto focus with tele but 120-300 2.8 does and does it very well i must say.

thanks for the responses still not sure to what im going to do, both have their advantages and disadvantages. I just need to win the lottery then enough said, local camera shop will be able to close early LOL!