Sigma 70-200MM F2.8 DG APO EX HSM Or Go Hell for leather and get Canon 70-200 IS?

[gerfoy3]

Hi,

 

I have a dilemma, I can't decide which lens to get. Yes I do want to

take budget into account which is where the Sigma falls into the

equation. I would also like to use the *2 tele with my chosen

purchase. Guess which ever I buy is kind of the road I'll be going

down for some time. I guess the cannon is the better but when you

take money and everything into consideration which would you go for?

What about the Canon F4 USM and F2.8 Non IS?

 

Thanks.

 

Ger..

[mike_earussi1]

Depends on what and how you plan to shoot. If you do most of your work hand-held, especially in dim light, then the IS lens is the best way to go. If on a tripod, then the f 2.8 non-IS Canon is the best overall optically of the four lenses, especially at 200mm. If you don't need the f 2.8 aperature then the f 4 would work. Again, it depends on your needs. Conversally, the biggest bang for the buck is the Sigma, especially at 70mm. But personally I would never put a 2x on any lens, regardless of manufacture, as it just lowers the optical quality way too much, but 1.4x's are fine.

 

For a detailed analysis of the lenses, check out http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html

 

Mike

[craig_gillette]

I think he's pretty well nailed it. There are marked price differences and probably a lot less marked performance differences. Of course, in completely irrelevant cosmetics, the Canon win.

 

The best optically is the non-is Canon, the is has some functional advantages. And the Sigma has the budget lead. All these differences really would require personal evaluation. I in my real hands and wallet, the Sigma would win. In my bottom-less wallet gadget freak side, it would be the IS version

 

(Hey, I'm a KM user, the budget differential is even larger, the most recent competitive KM lenses are made essentially out of unobtanium and even reasonable older models seem to be rather ghastly on the used auction market as well - so that all probably outprice new Sigmas. There may be some gamblers hoping on Sony not jumping right in with pro lenses but nobody is talking. Auctions on some items have been just amazing. OTOH, IS is a non-issue.)

[mark u]

There's a new "macro" close focussing version of the Sigma expected to start delivery soon (June). It focusses down to 1m at all focal lengths - closer than any of the Canons, and a lot closer than the current version. The optics are said to have been redesigned and the claim is that the lens is optically superior to its older cousins. Perhaps wait for some early reviews before deciding?

[yakim_peled1]

1. I think that IS is an invaluable feature in tele-lenses.

 

2. The f/4 is lighter and cheaper but will slow your AF as the camera has half the light, in low light e.g. indoors this will be a problem. It also might limit your creative options as DoF might not be shallow enough.

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.