Sigma 70-200mm and Sigma 70-200mm MKII

A

AR101

Messages
133
Edit My Images
No
Hey everyone :)
What are the major differences between
the Sigma 70-200mm and
the Sigma 70-200mm MKII

The price is quite different, that I noticed.
Any first hand experience?
Thanks,
Adam
 
Hi, there isn't a mk2 version, there's the 70-200 F/4L, the 70-200 F/4 L IS (image stabilised), 70-200 F/2.8 L and the 70-200 F/2.8 L IS (image stabilised), the last two are more expensive because they are faster and work better in low light.
 
Sigma don't make L glass wez.

Adam, at a guess the difference is in the lens coating, that seems to be the only recent 'improvement' in the rest of Sigmas range over the older versions, that and a price hike of course. Do you have a link to the cheaper model you were thinking of?
 
Just priced the Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG HSM Macro MKII at mifsuds and it's only £639 while the version 1 of that lens can be had from OneStop for £433.99
 
It seems like quite a lot more just for some extra coating on the lens, thats why I was wondering if there was a performance improvement.
Still, so very cheap for what it is.
 
Ok the sigma MK 0 is a 70-200mm F2.8 APO EX HSM lens NO extra coating and no Macro on it.

The Mk 1 sigma is a 70-200mm EX DG APO HSM lens and is not ment to be as sharp as the MK 0.

I have the MK 0 and love it

This MK 2 i cant say i seen befor
 
The DG and pre-DG versions are excellent.

I thought Sigma dropped the ball a bit with the MK I macro version, pretty soft and dreamy wide open @ 200mm. Maybr the MKII corrected this? The MKI was only on the market for about a year before being replaced with the MKI.

If you can get a DG or pre-DG used these should be excellent (ask the seller for sample images wide open 200mm, it should be sharp)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top