Sigma vs Canon??

friesianfan69

friesianfan69

Messages
769
Name
Donna
Edit My Images
Yes
Im sure i remember reading somewhere that there is a sigma lens equally as good as the 70-200mk 1 or 2 ( cant remember which, was a review somewhere ) Is that correct or am i talking rubbish?
 
Come on........surely that is quite easy to find looking at the Sigma range. It is the 70-200 2.8, it is faster (being 2.8 vs F4 for sim price) and although it's sharp I'd say it is not as sharp as the Canon, especially at 200mm.

Given they cost around the same, unless 2.8 is important to you I'd get the Canon. Plenty of info in this section on both lenses if you do some digging.
 
shabba said:
Come on........surely that is quite easy to find looking at the Sigma range. It is the 70-200 2.8, it is faster (being 2.8 vs F4 for sim price) and although it's sharp I'd say it is not as sharp as the Canon, especially at 200mm.

Given they cost around the same, unless 2.8 is important to you I'd get the Canon. Plenty of info in this section on both lenses if you do some digging.
Click to expand...

ok great thankyou...better start saving
 
I hired one, it's good but not that good. Read up, seems most feel the same.

IMO £500 new or £350 used is still superb value for this (Canon) lens given the quality, if you want a cheaper option go for the 55-250mm (Canon) around £130, seems the best of the entry level zooms.

I psoted a thread probably 5-10 pages back on zoom lenses at set price levels, start there.
 
shabba said:
Come on........surely that is quite easy to find looking at the Sigma range. It is the 70-200 2.8, it is faster (being 2.8 vs F4 for sim price) and although it's sharp I'd say it is not as sharp as the Canon, especially at 200mm.

Given they cost around the same, unless 2.8 is important to you I'd get the Canon. Plenty of info in this section on both lenses if you do some digging.
Click to expand...

As Donna made reference to the 70-200 mk1 or 2 she was presumably referring to the f2.8 version and not the f4 version.
 
neil_g said:
i think one of the mods even suggests its as sharp as the canon 2.8?
Click to expand...

You have a very strange idea of what makes a moderator of a forum.. it certainly isnt there ability to test lens :)
 
TBH I have no experience of either of the 70-200 f2.8 Sigma EX DGs (HSM or OS) but DPReview has a good review of the newer OS lens which IMHO puts it wide open (at f2.8) somewhere behind the canon Mk 2 equivalent and probably on a par with the Mk1.

The new Sigma looks a cracking lens if not quite up to the Canon 70-200 f2.8IS L Mk2 in some respects. It is though considerably less expensive.

Regards
 
I had a Sigma 70-200 (actually, still do). I also have the Canon 70-200 F2.8 MKII.

For me (ignorning the price difference), I can happily shoot in confidence at 2.8 with the Canon and expect sharp images. My Sigma (which may well be a Friday lens - or at least doesn't work with my body) was a different ball game - I suspect back focusing.

This is only my personal experience, but I am very happy with the Canon 70-200 F2.8 MK2.

Cheers.

Dav
 
My Sigma 70-200 2.8 EX II is very sharp at f/2.8. In fact that's where I use it most for indoor show jumping.
 
New about £600 on Amazon, 2nd hand about £400.
 
I wasnt overly impressed with mine at all focal lengths, think it got soft at 200mm end.
I soold it in favour for a 135 L which i am more happy with even with the restriction of no zoom!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top