70-200mm 2.8 - sigma or canon - DPChallenge Forums

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

06/10/2007 11:18:51 AM · #1

i've the option of buying the canon 70-200m f:2.8L USM used for $900.00

but am thinking of going with the Sigma Zoom Telephoto 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG APO Macro HSM new instead.

i'm a bit skeptical of buying used even though the seller is a friend of mine. and have been told by a number of folks the sigma is pretty much of equal quality. it's also less $$ than the used canon.

any thoughts?

this sigma doesn't appear to be listed under the lenses here.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

06/10/2007 11:25:37 AM · #2

Can you borrow the Canon to try it out, and find the Sigma locally to try? If so, try shooting them both wide open, at both ends of the zoom range, and see what you think.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II

06/10/2007 11:35:30 AM · #3

i could borrow the canon ( i've actually already used it last year), but it's unlikely i'd be able to try the sigma. not a big market here in the sticks ;}

the reviews i've read of the sigma are stellar.

the teleconverter is sizably less that the canon brand as well, which is also a factor - i'd like to buy both at the same time. this is why i am going with the 2.8 -vs the canon f4L

Message edited by author 2007-06-10 11:36:15.

MattO

Nikon D4

06/10/2007 11:57:01 AM · #4

As a guy who has had both, I will tell you what my findings are.

Depending on what you are going to do with it you very well may be pleased with the Sigma if money is an issue. I found that the Sigma was good with focus, had a bit of yellow tint to the photos and under certain circumstances was prone to CA. It also had issues with locking fast moving objects in low light situations.

I went with the canon simply for faster AF and low light performance when tracking fast moving objects. The colors are a bit more pure straight out of the camera, but I also paid about $350 USD more for my 70-200 2.8 non IS canon.

The newer version of the sigma also has a macro function that mine didnt and may perform better then the older-2006 version that I had.

MattO

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

06/10/2007 12:33:24 PM · #5

the sigma was prone to CA where the canon isn't? i've got the sigma 105 f:2.8 macro, and haven't had any issues with it in that regard, and they are both DG. though i'd agree with the yellowish tint.

the sigmas got 2 ELD glasses, and two SLD elements.

the guy that's selling is upgrading to the IS version. but also lives in a pretty damp area on the shore of the lake. that's my main gripe with the used lens. i don't want mold for $900, and i'm not really sure how to tell if it's there... i could likely beat him down to $800 is push comes to shove...

Message edited by author 2007-06-10 12:34:27.

smyk

Nikon D200

06/10/2007 12:38:28 PM · #6

I personally do not like SIGMA at all. I have the 10-20mm, the 17-200, and the marco. I only like the macro lens.

The lenses are slow to focus and I don't like how the colors come out with. I don't the optics are that great on sigmas.

MattO

Nikon D4

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II

06/10/2007 12:56:49 PM · #7

Originally posted by soup:

I have never noticed CA on my Canon lens, I did notice it with bright backgrounds and dark subjects on the sigma. Mine was a DG version bought new in April 2006 from B&H so it wasnt old stuff. Although it was replaced last year with a newer-Macro version of the lens my understanding is that they helped with CA with the newer version.

See if he can give you a date code on the used Canon your looking at If the price is right I wouldnt be too worried about the lens unless its abused.

MattO