70-200L IS f2.8 v. 70-200EX f2.8

[jojo_ma]

I've posted some new lens test shots, including my latest with the

Canon 70-200 IS and the Sigma 70-200 EX. Feel free to post comments

there.

 

http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/lenstests

[alexdi]

Excellent test, as seems to be your norm. Very impressive showing by the Sigma.

 

DI

[jojo_ma]

Thanks, David. The Sigma for $700 dollars is a fantastic value as its build and overall optics are excellent. I do think the Canon IS is the standard of this category and is the reason most Canon pro-wedding photogs use it. But for the serious hobbyist (or even pro), the Sigma can deliver the goods.

[ed_blagden]

I have never used the Canon 70-200 2.8L, so I don't know what I'm missing, but I have owned the Sigma 70-200 2.8EX for five years, and its a corker.

 

Firstly, image quality. As your tests show, excellent, even at 2.8. The real test is that I usually mate this lens with the Sigma 2X TC, for wildlife photography. Obviously there must be some image degradation, but I barely notice it, and the results are great provided I use a tripod or beanbag. The fact that the lens works so well with a 2x TC is a real testament to its quality.

 

Second, build quality. I know Sigma has a poor reputation for this in general, but this lens must be an exception. I use mine almost exclusively on safari, and it has survived 5 years of heavy use in extreme heat, dust, humidity etc, and it still works like new. I've yet to drop it off a cliff face, so I reserve the right to change my views!

 

Astonishingly good value. Shame it doesn't have IS.

 

Ed

[yakim_peled1]

>> Astonishingly good value.

 

I agree.

 

>> Shame it doesn't have IS.

 

Again I agree but when they will finally do that, you will not be able to re-chip the current one :-(

 

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

[tim_pedone]

Were the two shots of the porch both using the same exposure settings? The Sigma shot looks a bit washed out in comparison to the Canon. Is the Sigma perhaps a tad faster? Take a look at the shadows, in the Sigma shot, the shadows are lighter.

 

I'm considering purchasing this lens (Sigma). This test gives me a lot of confidence that it is the better bang for the buck.

 

Thanks,

 

Tim

[jojo_ma]

Tim, the shots were done in Av, about 20 seconds apart so lighting was identical. Looking at the EXIF and histogram, the Sigma did expose a tad brighter, about 1/3 a stop.

 

The Sigma is certainly a power-player. Thanks for the comments.