70 200, Sigma f2.8 new or Canon f4L used??

stumpybrown

stumpybrown

Messages
170
Edit My Images
No
What do you reckon? I cant afford IS, so thats out, and these are about the same price, actually Canon a wee bit cheaper...

Got my brothers wedding in NZ at the end of September and would like a nice tele to get some decent portraits.

Wedding will be outside. So f2.8 not necessarily needed for that, but would the advantage of f2.8 in the long run, outweigh the extra weight of carrying it all the way there(and back)?

Any thoughts??
 
I'd say the canon. I think it's possibly one of the most impressive lenses you can get short of going medium format.

Very fast and accurate to focus, great colours and there's nothing sharper.
 
Its a difficult trade-off. The Canon will be sharper and probably faster focusing, the Sigma has the extra stop (but is bigger and heavier). I have a Canon 300/4 and Siggy 300/2.8. Thought I'd be keeping the 2.8 but I like the sharpness and reliability of the Canon too much so the Siggy has to go.

Personally, I'd look to buy the Canon second hand at a reasonable price. If you don't like it you could probably pass it on without much of a loss.
 
neil_g said:
nowt wrong with the sharpness or the AF speed on the sigma..
Click to expand...

Have you compared the two side by side (I haven't, I should emphasise)? I was happy with my Siggy shots until I did straight comparisons with the Canon (300mm) - then the difference was very apparent. Same was true with my older Sony mount lenses. Siggy looked fine until compared to the top of the range Minolta glass.
 
no but then i wasnt saying one was better than the other just that the sigma is sharp and not slow at focusing like suggested..

no offence but not sure how the 300vs300 in your post helps with the sigma 70-200 vs canon 70-200 f4?
 
The Sigma is very capable of taking a great image.

This is a sample of it at 200mm F2.8

Click the pic of a bigger version:


You need to 110% utterly stable (IE tripod!) to get a shot this good at 200mm F2.8!!!!
But it can be done!!

I'm still considering selling my Nikon gear and going Canon, for other reason too, but mainly so I can get a 70-200 F4 L :love:
 
Sharpness and AF speed are all relative aren't they? As I said, I was always pleased with Sigma lenses until I compared them to (more expensive) alternatives. Then they would show their limitations.

Sure 300 v 300 isn't 70-200 v 70-200 but it is Sigma v Canon L. Not ideal but hopefully some information content.

I've taken some of my best shots with Sigma lenses so I am not trying to slag them off, but the OP wanted a recommendation and mine would be to try the Canon.
 
Thanks for the advice all. You've certainly given me a few things to think about, canon looking on top just now due to size and weight (amongst other things).

Again Many Thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top