Sigma 70-200 f2.8 opinions

T

The Pielander

Messages
128
Name
John
Edit My Images
No
I've been so caught up in only considering Canon lenses over the years that it is only recently I've opened my eyes to third party lenses after buying a Sigma 17-50 f2.8 which I'm really happy with. I've been browsing the Sigma range and noticed the 70-200 F2.8 which can be bought new for around £680. That seems like a really good deal for me but whats the catch?

There is no way I would ever splash out on the Canon 70-200 F2.8 as photography is only a hobby and I personally couldn't justify it. I just want something that will give me pleasing pictures viewed on an IMac and 40" TV and that is easy to carry around. Does anyone have any experience of this lens?
 
I use one on Nikon, bought used from the classifieds for just under £400. There are plenty on here who would say go for the Canon/Nikon version but I'm very happy with it.
 
Use mine all the time. it's a bit soft at 2.8 but generally a great performer
 
I use a Sigma 70-200 for ice hockey Photos , can be soft at 2.8 at 200mm but still returns great photos even at low light ,

100% crop at 200mm f/2.8, iso 1600, 1/500

45709_1578136139817_1428043014_1497419_2866738_n.jpg
 
also interested in this lens, whats the difference between the mk1 and mk2 if you dont mind me asking.

wes
:D
 
Thanks for your replies.

Is the lens compatible with the 1.4x and 2x convertors too? Does it retain autofocussing with these convertors?
 
janbokev said:
I use a Sigma 70-200 for ice hockey Photos , can be soft at 2.8 at 200mm but still returns great photos even at low light ,

100% crop at 200mm f/2.8, iso 1600, 1/500

45709_1578136139817_1428043014_1497419_2866738_n.jpg
Click to expand...

That looks brilliant, ive been looking in to the canon L series 70-200 f2.8 is and thats a little bit of money.
Whats the diff in this lens between mk1 and mk2 compared to the sigmas
 
I have been researching this lens for a while now, and have come to the conclusion that the mkII is highly regarded. A few comments on focussing issues but most were sorted by calibration by Sigma. The vast majority of users appear to be very happy with this lens in terms of quality and value for money.
I think the big challenge at the moment is finding somewhere that has them in stock.
I am not sure if the Sigma have reduced stock because they want to direct customer on to the new OS version or if they are planning to discontinue. If anyone knows where they have stock of this lens I would be interested.
 
I had the Sigma 70-200 EX DG Macro MKII I did love it and it worked really well with a 1.4 extender.

I sold it to buy the Canon non is version because i got one for such a good price, on reflection i think the Canon produces sharper images, gives slightly better colour cast and depth, better build quality.
Having said all that if i was on a tight budget or looking to buy a few lenses then the money saved buying Sigma not Canon would be useful and i do not think anyone would be un-happy with the results the Sigma produces.
 
According to all the test's and reviews I have waded through in the last few days the Sigma 100-300mm F4 has the best IQ of the sigma telephoto's, if you need something around that range its worth looking at as there is one on e bay for £475 buy it now at present.
 
john182rs said:
That looks brilliant, ive been looking in to the canon L series 70-200 f2.8 is and thats a little bit of money.
Whats the diff in this lens between mk1 and mk2 compared to the sigmas
Click to expand...



I have one of the MK1's not even a macro one , bought it second hand for £370 and so far really pleased with the results , Until it was mentioned on here I was not aware of a MK 2 :( , the goal is to end up with a Canon 70 -200 but at the moment the £££ diference is an issue
 
i've got the mk1 sigma 70-200 2.8 ex, the non dg version, paid around £400 second hand, it's a great lens

only bad thing i've found is the min focus distance at 2m, but then again it's not a short lens really so can't complain!

i've had no problems with it, and i've found at 2.8 it's nice and sharp

this was taken over the weekend at the bournemouth air show, it's a 50% crop so a little zoomed in, but still very sharp

Taken with a Canon 20D, f3.5 200mm iso 100

Larger
4909748269_388d0b85c9_z_d.jpg
 
mk1 non dg version is great.. I had one for yrs.. was my first ever dslr lens... moved to canon L eventualy which is betetr... however I would never knock the siggy version.. great lens
 
Just sold mine in Nikon fit for £375 mint and boxed. The buyer has a cracking lens that whilst a little soft wide open is very sharp and very well built. I only sold it to get the 50-150 as the weight of the bigger lens is quite noticeable at the end of the day!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top