Telephoto

lucky_13

lucky_13

Messages
624
Name
Billy
Edit My Images
Yes
Tamron 70-200 f2.8 DI macro vs Sigma 70-200 f2.8 hsm II macro vs Canon 70-200 f4L is usm.
I know that the Canon is the only one here with IS and it's pretty damn sharp wide open, but what about the other 2? Are they any good to use indoor with low light and no IS hand held at shutter speeds of 1/50-1/100 of a sec?
 
What are you going to be shooting? That might determine whether the extra stop of light is more valuable that IS or vice versa.

FWIW I have a Nikon version of the Sigma and I'm pretty impressed. I was expecting it to be a little soft wide open but it most certainly isn't, even with a 2x teleconverter. Only slight criticism is that I don't think it's as contrasty as some high end lenses.
 
gad-westy said:
What are you going to be shooting? That might determine whether the extra stop of light is more valuable that IS or vice versa.

FWIW I have a Nikon version of the Sigma and I'm pretty impressed. I was expecting it to be a little soft wide open but it most certainly isn't, even with a 2x teleconverter. Only slight criticism is that I don't think it's as contrasty as some high end lenses.
Click to expand...

Well I have a 55-250 is and it's not very sharp and AF is very slow, I'm getting rid of that and wanted to replace it with something better, yesterday I was @ my boys school play in the schools gym and I did struggle to get a sharp bright shot under the low lights. But I'm thinking maybe the is would be essential at 200mm?
 
I went from the 55-250 to a 70-200 f4.0 is and absolutely love it, a massive difference in everything from the autofocus to the sharpness. If your shooting indoors though you would probabley benefit from the extra step of light, the Tamron from what ive read isnt the quickest so if this would be a problem youd be better of with the sigma.
 
For good light or mostly shooting static things, I'd take the 70-200 f/4L IS since it's very sharp and light for it's class. But for indoors/low light/moving subjects, it would have to be the sigma for the extra stop (the tamron gets reviewed as very sharp, but it's conventional micro motor makes it's AF firmly a class below the USM/HSM lenses, though it should still be more reliable in low light than your slower 55-250).

Plenty of users of both the sigma and the canon will tell you they're excellent lenses, and for your purposes any small difference in image quality simply shouldn't be as important as the extra stop :) At that focal length, 1/50-1/100sec is going to be iffy without IS (but remember IS does nothing about motion blur of subjects), but if you're getting 1/50-1/100 with the sigma at f/2.8, you could only be getting 1/25-1/50sec with the canon at f/4 (if you see what I'm getting at).
 
Last edited:
Are you using the zoom or shooting mainly at 200mm, because a prime lens would be significantly better, especially indoors. Most people say f2.8 minimum for indoor shots and that's why they tend to go for the prime lenses like the 135mm, 100mm or 200mm lenses
 
squishy said:
At that focal length, 1/50-1/100sec is going to be iffy without IS (but remember IS does nothing about motion blur of subjects), but if you're getting 1/50-1/100 with the sigma at f/2.8, you could only be getting 1/25-1/50sec with the canon at f/4 (if you see what I'm getting at).
Click to expand...

i was forced to shoot @ 1/60 to get a good shot without the kids moving around as when they did it would make thr shot blurry, but whenever i took the shutter speed up to 1/125 everything was dark and that is with the is turned on.
 
pete.rush said:
Are you using the zoom or shooting mainly at 200mm, because a prime lens would be significantly better, especially indoors. Most people say f2.8 minimum for indoor shots and that's why they tend to go for the prime lenses like the 135mm, 100mm or 200mm lenses
Click to expand...

unfortunately I do use the zoom, i was jamming the lens at 250 most of the time but in general i do use the whole range. Ive read a lot of good stuff about the Tamron 70-300 VC USD and it seems to be pretty sharp too.
 
The 70-300 VC is an excellent lens, however not that great in low light, its a little off the wall but have you considered a full frame body such as the 5D, you would loose range but even on the classic I find higher ISO noise acceptable
 
lucky_13 said:
i was forced to shoot @ 1/60 to get a good shot without the kids moving around as when they did it would make thr shot blurry, but whenever i took the shutter speed up to 1/125 everything was dark and that is with the is turned on.
Click to expand...

Do you know what aperture at?
 
JohnN said:
have you considered a full frame body such as the 5D, you would loose range but even on the classic I find higher ISO noise acceptable
Click to expand...

That's not an option I'm afraid.
 
lucky_13 said:
Yeah 5.6 that's wide open on the 55-250
Click to expand...

So at F/4 you could be at 1/125 and with IS, that sounds like a pretty sensible shutter speed. At F/2.8, you could be at 1/250 so IS would be of no concern. Might give more flexibility. I don't think you'll go far wrong with either option.
 
gad-westy said:
So at F/4 you could be at 1/125 and with IS, that sounds like a pretty sensible shutter speed. At F/2.8, you could be at 1/250 so IS would be of no concern. Might give more flexibility. I don't think you'll go far wrong with either option.
Click to expand...

It makes sense. My worry is that at 200mm at 1/250 is the is necessary?! Perhaps I'll turn the is of on my 55-250 and try to shoot at 200mm 1/250
 
Worth a go. Something to consider is that IS can effectively give you a couple of stops in terms of hand holding speed but what it will never do is freeze motion in the same way that a fast shutter speed will do. If that is a priority then F2.8 might suit you. Of course, in ideal world you'd have IS and F/2.8 but the £'s start piling on.
 
gad-westy said:
Worth a go. Something to consider is that IS can effectively give you a couple of stops in terms of hand holding speed but what it will never do is freeze motion in the same way that a fast shutter speed will do. If that is a priority then F2.8 might suit you. Of course, in ideal world you'd have IS and F/2.8 but the £'s start piling on.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what I want, but at the tune of £1800. I think I might give it a miss.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top