Sigma 70-200 2.8 - which one?

JohnN

JohnN

Messages
6,359
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,

Given that I have the long range covered and am only now looking to help me with shallow DoF & bringing in more light I'm looking to the 2.8's

Now the mother of all 70-200's (ie Canon mk II) is just too expensive and I'm looking to have decent AF too I'm probably down to the Sigma's

So..

Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG MACRO HSM II (£599.00)
Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 EX DG OS HSM (£899.00 - although I have seen it on import for £758.00 but thats out of stock at the mo)

Of course I would consider the Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8L USM (£979.00) but its a lot more and I might as well get OS for less money, plus I've heard the IQ of the OS version at least is better.

Tamron was ruled out as I heard the AF is poor.

I've taken a look at the image archives and all three mentioned look pretty good, but to my eye the Sigma's seem better.

What are your thoughts\findings?

PS: I posted this on a Canon focused site too, but am always interested in a more local angle too.
 
Hi,

I'm thinking of buying a 70-200 lens as well and have been stuck as to which one to get the same as you.
I already own a Sigma 150-500 and quite like the feel of their lenses but like you would love peoples opinion on either the o/s or non o/s or the Canon non stabilised 2.8.
If you do get one let us know which and results you're getting and if I beat you to it I shall do the same:)
 
Cheers will do, I doubt I'll get mine for a while (well August anyway - a pressie from my wife)
 
I'm really looking at the 2.8's but I'm curious why not Sigma at all - reviews I've looked at rated it well and generally people that have used both seem to say things like 85% of the IQ (of the Mk II) at 65% of the price.

By the way I owned a 70-200 F4 (non-IS) and wasn't blown away by it.
 
I have the non OS Sigma (the mk2) and it's pin sharp across the whole focal frame at f/2.8 on my copped 50d.

I've not used it much on my 5d mk1 (as the 5d is too sluggish for what I use the 70-200 for!) but it's always seemed just as sharp as the images I get from the 50d at f/2.8 even on the FF sensor.

It's a beautiful lens.

IMO it's just as good as the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 mk1 in all but build.
 
Jim, I've been reading more - how do you find it under 2m at 2.8?

I ask because I read its pretty soft there and funily enough I could see using it like that.

Just to fill in a little more where I go with the family a fair bit (Rufford Park) theres a bit round teh lake that I don;t even bother to raise the lens as my current zoom lenses just won't get enough light or as so slow that the movement of a goose walking will render the image useless.
 
I have a 70-200 and love it i just dont use it anymore! AF is dead sharp aswell. Great lens
 
Thanks for the feedback, but do you mind if I ask which flavour of 70-200 and what you now use in its place?
 
I have the OS, non macro version. Paid £999 for it about 8 months ago.

The build quality is excellent and coupled with my 60D I find it to be pin sharp and fast. Of course I would love the Canon version but can't justify the extra expense. The Sigma is a worthy alternative imvho.

Andy
 
he 70-200 sigma os is wonderful, i used it and didn't notice too much image quality drop from the canon, and it was leagues ahead of the old non os sigma
 
I have the 70-200 OS and its very sharp, Sigmas QC is a bit hit and miss but when you get a good copy its superb, the OS version imo is well worth the extra few quid as Ive had the non OS HSM DG APO MACRO in all mounts and they never came close to my new OS wide open. From reviews its only slightly worse than the IS mkii and VR2.
 
Last edited:
Thank you all, I've broken the news that the expensive one is the one to get (now there's a shock:))
 
JohnN said:
Jim, I've been reading more - how do you find it under 2m at 2.8?

I ask because I read its pretty soft there and funily enough I could see using it like that.

Just to fill in a little more where I go with the family a fair bit (Rufford Park) theres a bit round teh lake that I don;t even bother to raise the lens as my current zoom lenses just won't get enough light or as so slow that the movement of a goose walking will render the image useless.
Click to expand...

Under 2m? It's just as sharp no matter how close or far I shoot! It's the same as any f/2.8 in terms of light transmission to the sensor, can't comment on the lake as I've not been there! If it's that dark an f/1.4 prime might be the answer.
 
Gregory Hicks said:
I have the non is verson, hsm 2 with macro, i use my 100mm 2.8 is macro l now
Click to expand...

The Sigma isn't really a macro though, it just has a closer min focus distance than other 70-200.

OP - is this what you mean 'under 2m'? If so don't expect to use it as a dedicated macro lens as it isn't, it's a telephoto pure and simple.

If you want a macro, as I say, get a dedicated lens.
 
It was something I'd read about the non OS version being soft at the extremes, it may have been v1 I forget now, but I do remember them saying it wasn't an issue with the OS version as it had had a complete overhaul
 
JohnN said:
It was something I'd read about the non OS version being soft at the extremes, it may have been v1 I forget now, but I do remember them saying it wasn't an issue with the OS version as it had had a complete overhaul
Click to expand...

Not mine!
 
Excellent, cheers Jim, the internet is a funny place, you really can dig up all sorts of rubbish it seems.

Looks like other than getting both myself (won't happen) the only way to know for sure is to find someone who has upgraded to the OS and get their findings.

Mrjames, from your answer above, have you had both?
 
Last edited:
Have you thought about buying 2nd hand? You could pick up a Canon 2.8 IS for similar money to a new Sigma OS - there's often one in the Classifieds here
 
John AFAIK the first lens with the old zoom grip is sharper than the newer version APO DG EX MACRO HSM, also has less AF issues.
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
The Sigma isn't really a macro though, it just has a closer min focus distance than other 70-200.

OP - is this what you mean 'under 2m'? If so don't expect to use it as a dedicated macro lens as it isn't, it's a telephoto pure and simple.

If you want a macro, as I say, get a dedicated lens.
Click to expand...

I just ment it is called a macro, says so on the box :-)
 
Just a rubbish quick sample at 2.8, minimum focus distance, 200mm which is supposed to be the worst end of this lens... Sigma 70-200 OS.

 
twist said:
John AFAIK the first lens with the old zoom grip is sharper than the newer version APO DG EX MACRO HSM, also has less AF issues.
Click to expand...

Having used the mk1 I can confirm that's an Internet rumour!

What AF issues has the mk2 got? I've never known a mk2 to have AF issues, mine locks pretty much instantly and you can't even hear it operate, it's damn near perfect!
 
Perhaps you were lucky, I've never heard of a mk1 have bf or ff issues, I've personally experienced and read of many others having bf ff issues with mk2 lenses. To give you an idea I had 3 mk2 in Nikon mount before I found a decent copy @ f2.8, 2 copies in Sony until I sent the last in for calibration then it was spot on and the OS in Canon was perfect first time (thankfully!)
 
Last edited:
I am a little wary of the old version, simply because in a year or so I hope to get a 5D3 but it does sound good, that also makes me wonder about the canon mk1 IS but the IS wont be as good as the OS plus I think the second hand price is near 1k, in which case you're getting close to the mk2 price, and I find monopods too restrictive

I forgot to thank you earlier for the piccy Twist! I appreciate you doing that for me and it looks fine and if that's the worst it can do, then I'd love to see the best :)
 
Last edited:
I had the 70-200 (non-OS) and it was a good lens but I got a copy that needed a focus adjust straight out of the box, which was annoying. Other than that, very sharp lens across the f-stop range (moreso at f/4 than at f/2.8) and very well made. I bought for Nikon but at the time, I got mine for £450, which was a massive saving over any equivalent that Nikon produced.

Maybe have a look for a minty Canon version, maybe a non-IS version?...
 
I've just been watching the FroKnowsPhoto on the HSM II and it looks pretty good, interesting how well its standing up against the Nikon version.

Now one more question (I know!), mainly to Neil by the look of it, any issues on full frame - I know the lens works on the EF, but Fro said how good it was on the crop, which made me wonder if there were issues full frame.

PS - Just noticed the HSM II is now discontinued - still a few around second hand and if it looks good the saving would get me a little closer to the 5D3!
 
JohnN said:
Now one more question (I know!), mainly to Neil by the look of it, any issues on full frame - I know the lens works on the EF, but Fro said how good it was on the crop, which made me wonder if there were issues full frame.
Click to expand...

absolutely no issues at all, even on the 5dmk2 theyre great lenses. they give me no real reason to want to "upgrade" to the canon offerings to be honest.
 
Cool, now all I have to do is wait until my birthday (months away!) and see if there still are any now its been discontinued.

Unless of course a well priced OS comes up ;)
 
Last edited:
I've got the HSM II for my Nikon setup and it is my best lens as well as being my 2nd cheapest (£320 from ebay inc postage). It is very sharp and the focussing is fast and accurate. It's not quite as good as my Canon 70-200 F4 IS (which had a slight FF issue, easily corrected in camera, so it's not just Sigma) but it's not as far off as I was expecting.

The thing I really do miss is the weather sealing. I took my 7D and 70-200 F4 IS out in all weathers without a worry, now I'm almost paranoid about a drop of rain getting on the Sigma.

Also like Neil, I've got no issues at all on full frame.
 
Last edited:
I'm not too worried about sealing as I don't trust Canon to honour it should it go wrong (and have read that they don't), so I'll always be paranoid :)

How did you get a II that cheap - just good timing or is it a seller I missed?
 
Toggerman said:
I've got the HSM II for my Nikon setup and it is my best lens as well as being my 2nd cheapest (£320 from ebay inc postage). It is very sharp and the focussing is fast and accurate. It's not quite as good as my Canon 70-200 F4 IS (which had a slight FF issue, easily corrected in camera, so it's not just Sigma) but it's not as far off as I was expecting.

The thing I really do miss is the weather sealing. I took my 7D and 70-200 F4 IS out in all weathers without a worry, now I'm almost paranoid about a drop of rain getting on the Sigma.

Also like Neil, I've got no issues at all on full frame.
Click to expand...

I had my sigma and 7d out in the stormy weather no problems atall......
 
^^ likewise. Had mine attached to my 50d (and TC) last year at Silverstone during the practise downpour (ie deluge!) and it didn't miss a beat!
 
I have the Nikon HSMII - its been a good servant. I just bought the Nikon VRI so will be interesting to see the difference.

The Sigma performs well however id say it overexposed in typical scenario, I did a lot of amature sport though so the light was welcome in the winter evenings!

Looking forward to playing with the Nikon one though.

It performed very well with the 2x converter.
 
Wonderful - its funny the other forum I asked this question on all say get the OS and this seems mostly for the HSM II, lol, thats the internet for you :)

I understand from what I've read that the OS is actually the better lens, but is it almost double the price better, from what I've seen so far no, but then it depends on what you could get it for I've seen the HSM II for £450 second hand which is pretty attractive or £589 new and the OS at £758 new (but usually £899) and I've yet to see one second hand on a Canon mount.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top