Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM

Thanks folks...Great link. Will read up after I read the freakin' 200 pages of other stuff I really need to be concentrating on! Ahhh, grad school!

idsurfer wrote in post #13679505
Also, are you folks turning OS on and off when you take the lens on and off? I'll never remember to do that! I'm a little confused with the manual. Thanks

The line in the manual about turning off the OS is the same in all of the Sigma lenses. But the Sigma lenses appear to handles OS differently depending on the model. The 28-200 appears to leave OS on all the time. The 17-70 f2.8-4 Macro OS HSM waits a full 60 seconds before turning off the OS. I have removed these lenses while the OS was engaged and didn't break anything but I can see how it would be a good idea not to.

The 70-200 f2.8 EX DG OS HSM lens in particular shuts off the OS just two seconds after you release your half press on the shutter (or back button focus). So if you let off the buttons and it takes you two seconds before you take the lens off, the OS is already disengaged and you have nothing to worry about. This is the same as the Canon.(The Canon manual recommends that one lets the IS settle before dismounting the lens.)
If you don't want to wait that two seconds you can turn off the camera, or you can turn off the OS on the lens before removing it. Both will immediately shut off the OS. But I'm pretty sure this line in the manual really is meant for some of the other lenses where the OS runs for a long time after releasing the shutter button or even continually.


There's another complete thread dedicated to switching off the OS here:
https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1128286

The short version is this:
1.) Different lenses leave the OS on for different lengths of time - ranges seem to be from 2 to 60 seconds.
2.) It is a good idea to make sure the OS is off before removing the lens.
3.) You can do this by either turning off the OS, turning off the camera, or waiting and listening for it to turn itself off (in all cases so far, turning off the camera turns off the OS as well)
4.) Get to know how each of your lenses handles OS and you won't have anything to worry about.

Thanks for the info Kevin

Inspired by one of Mondayshift's great shots over in the 5DII thread..Really going to have to spend some time with this lens.

I know it isn't the latest version, but here's one I took with the old HSM I version of this lens (no OS)

av8r wrote in post #13679560
I agree. The WB was slightly cooler with the Sigma. Weirdly enough the Canon required more NR and sharpening (not by much) which confuses me. The WB could have been that my daughter was standing camera left making her lunch when I took the Canon shots. Either way...as much as I want to do it...it's very hard to justify the difference in cost between these two lenses.

Actually I'd say almost all of the variances could be explained by the light reflected or blocked by your daughter. With a difference in light, you're going to see slightly different noise levels given the same ISO settings, WB differences based on color of clothing reflecting the light, focus accuracy based on amount of light.

In any case, I agree with the point that it's extremely difficult to justify the Canon. Plus this lens is a lot less attention-grabbing being black

ryane67 wrote in post #13683232
In any case, I agree with the point that it's extremely difficult to justify the Canon. Plus this lens is a lot less attention-grabbing being black

This is a positive for me. But some of course prefer the attention you get with a white lens. Personally I'd prefer not to be a theft magnet.

kfreels wrote in post #13683490
This is a positive for me. But some of course prefer the attention you get with a white lens. Personally I'd prefer not to be a theft magnet.

I agree.

I had a 70-200 f4IS and the attraction it bought was incredible.

One comment I cringed over was:

"You look like Papparazi"...

As silly as it sounds, the white on the canon rules it out for me. I already have a hard time with carrying around the DSLR with prime and a flash. I like to blend in. I have been playing with this new one for a couple days and the reality of it is is that I am not sure if I will be able to tolerate the size of it. Not that I'm weak and don't want to carry it, but holy cow it's big! A real head turner. Again, if it was white it would be out. Maybe I'll slowly introduce it to the public...

idsurfer wrote in post #13684976
As silly as it sounds, the white on the canon rules it out for me. I already have a hard time with carrying around the DSLR with prime and a flash. I like to blend in. I have been playing with this new one for a couple days and the reality of it is is that I am not sure if I will be able to tolerate the size of it. Not that I'm weak and don't want to carry it, but holy cow it's big! A real head turner. Again, if it was white it would be out. Maybe I'll slowly introduce it to the public...

They will get used to it.

They often think it has the resolving power of a telecope though...

mtimber wrote in post #13685606
They will get used to it.

They often think it has the resolving power of a telecope though...

Yeah. I heard "Man I bet that lens is at least 1000x, isn't it?" in DC. Then I have a friend who insists that the 55-250 is better because it has wider range, it's longer, and more compact....and it is designed specifically for digital cameras......

idsurfer wrote in post #13684976
As silly as it sounds, the white on the canon rules it out for me. I already have a hard time with carrying around the DSLR with prime and a flash. I like to blend in. I have been playing with this new one for a couple days and the reality of it is is that I am not sure if I will be able to tolerate the size of it. Not that I'm weak and don't want to carry it, but holy cow it's big! A real head turner. Again, if it was white it would be out. Maybe I'll slowly introduce it to the public...

It's definitely big.. and heavy. I took it out on my lunch break yesterday. Walking around for 30 minutes, adding a little support to the lens with my left hand, as my neck strap is on the camera, my arm was a bit tired!

ryane67 wrote in post #13686765
It's definitely big.. and heavy. I took it out on my lunch break yesterday. Walking around for 30 minutes, adding a little support to the lens with my left hand, as my neck strap is on the camera, my arm was a bit tired!

You need an R-strap or one of the cheaper Ebay Quick Straps for this heavy lens.

I wouldn't personally wear a kneck strap with this, asking for an injury...

mtimber wrote in post #13687814
You need an R-strap or one of the cheaper Ebay Quick Straps for this heavy lens.

I wouldn't personally wear a kneck strap with this, asking for an injury...

Awesome, more junk to buy!!

idsurfer wrote in post #13687843
Awesome, more junk to buy!!

This forum has ways of making your wallet talk...

idsurfer wrote in post #13687843
Awesome, more junk to buy!!

I have this one. Just $10 and it works great.
http://www.amazon.com/​gp/product/B004UM5YQY