Just got my Sigma 70-200 2.8

I just have to say WOW!

I am totaly new to photography and was really unsure how a better lens would suit me, if it was really worth the investment. In a word "yep"!

I didn't realize how slow the A/F was on my other consumer lenses were until I got this thing..man it's quiet and fast.

First thing I noticed taking it out of the box was, this sure isn't a toy. It's big,heavy, and the finish is awesome...just makes ya feel warm all over when picking it up

I had to run outside and snap some shots as soon as my company left. It was just after 8pm with very low light but I figured it would be a good time to see what a lens like that can do.

If I had been using any one of my other lenses I would not even attempted this especialy hand held.

Bare in mind I am extremely ametuer as this is my first real camera so hand shake and exposers will be off as I am trying to learn everything. These images were not sharpened at all nor was the brightness or contrast or colors...they were just cropped out and saved for the Web in PS CP...

Let me say sorry for posting pics in this area, but it may help some new people make up their minds on this lens.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Congratulations you now have one of the most versatile lens out there at 70-200 f/2.8

Nice purchase. I had this and a Bigma in my bag at one time: heavy is not the word Replaced a nice Canon 70-200mm L because I needed the 2.8 more than the more friendly size of the f4.

You'll find your shots improve as you get to know its characteristics. The HSM motor is very good quality isn't it ... and AF really zips into place sharply. Try a few under 'ideal conditions', even on a tripod, experiment with manual camera settings and see what happens.

A great lens to own.

The more i see and hear about this lens the more i like. It's really down to this lens and the 70-200 2.8 IS for me. I'm going to end up with one of them at some point.

The Canon IS version would have been a good option since 75% of what I will shoot will be freehand but probably sports.
I just could not part with that money when I could get decent results with this lens for 725.00 from DeltaInternational.com​...snappy service and shipping.

I have to be as rational as i can be (which i find hard to be with lens purchases) when choosing one. Common sense would say, £1300 for the canon for a very much amateur might be a bit more then what you need Sean. Then the other side says get the best lens you can get.

congratulations. I had a share of mediocre lenses before I got this one. It's one of the best photo purchases I've made.

shoot sports requiring high shutter speeds under crummy light (like indoors, or baseball at twilight), and then you'll really appreciate what this lens can do. Or, concerts, plays, etc...

now, this lens will make you dislike your other lenses. Down the slippery slope you go.

I can see it already happening David.

I have posted a bunch of shots from this morning at http://www.texasphotof​orum.com/

Since I don't have a host, this site allows bigger sized images, plus it's local.

I used to have this lens. The glass quality was good but mine aparently had a ramdon autofocus problem and it was giving me wrong focused pictures most of the time (it was hit and miss). I decided to upgrade to a canon and now wherever I put the red dot, that is where the focus goes. Hope you got a good unit and congratulations on your new lens.

Cheers

I ran into similar stories that arpi mentioned. I heard from people that used the sigma 70-200 and have focus problems at both ends 70mm adn the 200mm. You should check this out. For some reason the Nik*n don't seem to have this problem as much as Canon does. Not sure if it has to do with the multiplication factor 1.5 vs 1.6. I have personally also tried this lens and the images just isn't the same when compaing side by side with the Nik*n. Digital Rebel 300D verses the D70 with the same lens, same subject same distance. (Canon a little more because of the multiplication)... Both lens I extended to it's fullest and taken the same photo.
Personally I stil like this lens but beginning to lean towards the 70-200 Canon 2.8 L lens. I am fortunately enough to try both and both are excellent lens with pros and cons. Canon obviously better overall but $price$ is somewhat a problem...

Is it me or does the flag in second pic look OOF? and also the third shot or is that just soft? I had my mind set up for the Canon 70-200 F/4 but I'm heavyly leaning towrds this lens. Just wondering if the DOF is that short.

The flag is faded so that is its natural color also it is about 4 to 5 feet away from the wall, the POF was on the sign and not the flag. This was shot about 150 feet away hand held at 8pm so light was an issue.
Also I'm a total newb so my camera shake and settings probably are not optimal to show it's true ability.

Just posted some photos in the sports section using this lens ,first time out, what do you think?

Alan.

Well Alan i can't fault them, you're doing a good job of selling that lens to me.

I just posted as well. Great shots Alan!