Canon 70-200F4 L or Sigma 70-200mm F2.8

D

DinoS

Hmmmmm.......Paste!
Messages
2,823
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,

Im looking at both of these lenses as second hand they are around the same price.

My main concern is sharpness wide open, as i need a sharp lens.

How do they compare to each other,

Thanks

Mark
 
I have the 70-200 Macro II from sigma. It is sharp, very sharp, ithink you will find the only difference between the 2 is by pixel peeping and not real work use?
I took this today infact, it is stopped a bit but shows you what it is capable of.

3282038887_b00359c13a_o.jpg


Hope this helps
Lee
 
I've had the macro and the older non macro, if you can find one go for the older EX non macro, they make as much on ebay as the newer macro for a reason, the macro is good at F/2.8 but not as good as the EX.

IMO some of the sharpness was sacrificed to accommodate the Macro, the HSM II is supposed to be better but I haven't tried one of those.
 
I too am interested in the Canon 70-200 f4L. I'm tempted to pick up a non IS one on ebay to try it out, but I think the IS would be useful and wonder if I should wait.

I have the 100-400 but it is a bit of a lump, that's why I'm interested in the f4 rather than the f2.8
 
the extra stop could be useful in low light, never had both in my hands so can't compare sharpness, but maybe find online reviews?
 
wack61 said:
I've had the macro and the older non macro, if you can find one go for the older EX non macro, they make as much on ebay as the newer macro for a reason, the macro is good at F/2.8 but not as good as the EX.

IMO some of the sharpness was sacrificed to accommodate the Macro, the HSM II is supposed to be better but I haven't tried one of those.
Click to expand...

um the macro is still EX and tbh isnt any less sharp..

this is from a gen 1 "macro" (its not a true macro remember, it just has a lower minimum focusing distance with different element groups) straight off the 20D with no processing..

2793857704_60f56f69f1.jpg


plenty more where that came from too if anyone wants more examples.
 
Hi,

Thanks for the reply, So how many Sigma 70-200mm are there?! And are they all pretty sharp?

Also whats a rough second hand value of one of these?

Many Thanks

Mark
 
I've got the EX DG version before the "Macro" and it's razor sharp.

This is a image handheld (braced against a wall) AND with a Kenko 1.5x TC
IMG_6532copy.jpg


This is a 100% crop
70200tcon100crop.jpg


As you can see in the EXIF it was taken quite a while ago now on my 350D, I also don't think I applied any sharpening in PP but don't hold me to that, it was too long ago :)

It's a very good little lens I'd only swap it for a Canon f2.8 purely for the IS.
 
and I've got the DG EX HSM macro V1 :)

An example from the 200mm end ....

bike_snet.jpg
 
all the shots posted are great, so it doesn't look like i need to worry about which version. Are these shot at F2.8 by the way
 
Quite a hard crop ,200mm f 3.2 i think .Sigma 70-200 EX DG HSM (non macro)

I'll try and look out summit taken at f2.8 200mm

Whats going on ,ma pic aint loading :thinking:

Ahhh .... there it is

img_2357.jpg
 
wow, that is a stunning photo. I think im going to look for a sigma 70-200 f2.8 now
 
I've got both :)

The Sigma at f2.8
3059121061_9ba16bf59b.jpg


and the Canon I use for walkabouts.
2739468714_3b50964b24.jpg


Both cracking lenses and it depends what you want to use them for and if you need the f2.8 (I do for weddings) The Canon f4 is just so much lighter than the Canon f2.8 or even the Sigma so I keep it for using when I know I'm not going to be down at f2.8.
Hope that helps but I don't think you would be disappointed with either.
 
AliB said:
The Canon f4 is just so much lighter than the Canon f2.8 or even the Sigma
Click to expand...

It is that which attracts me most. The IS version is about 760g which is getting down towards half the weight of the f2.8 canon or the Sigma.

It means it is much more likely to get included in the bag just in case rather than just when there is a specific reason.
 
neil_g said:
tbh i dont find the sigma heavy, i hand hold mine all day at motorsport events etc
Click to expand...

The Sigma is Ok weight wise, I use mine at weddings where I need f2.8 and I can be shooting with it for hours on end. I didn't get the Canon f2.8IS because it weighs nearly as much as a 100-400mm! I'd need the IS just to stabilise the blasted thing. I can hand hold the Sigma down to about 1/60sec at 200mm so I'm happy with that.

The Canon f4 is a little quicker than the Sigma on the focus so that's why I like taking things like the whippet in full flight with it. Good fun!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top