Sigma 70-200 2.8 help please

[timputtick]

Looking to buy a sigma 70-200 2.8 and i noticed the 70-200 2.8 apo hsm is much cheaper than the sigma 70-200 2.8 apo hsm ex dg os, is it worth the extra money? I'm buying the lens for sports photography, I won't be doing loads of low light work though. Does anybody know the difference in weight too? and any info in image quality would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

[Ads]

[ratssass]

if you go to sigma's site,it will tell you what each of them mean...

[lonewolfsx]

I'd go for the non OS version. The stabilizer is not that useful for sports if that's your focus.. however I am unsure optically. I really loved the APO HSM Macro version I used a bunch for various football games, though it wasn't super sharp at 200mm f/2.8 (however it's really good at f/4.0 or f/5.6 and if you're using it during the day, you can get away with those apertures)... supposedly the new one is improved [optically] but I haven't really seen any results or anything on the new version.

[HughGuessWho]

If you plan to ever use a Sigma Teleconverter, you MUST have the APO lens and they will not work on non-APO lenses.
Some people love OS (Sigma's Image Stability), I seldom use it.
If you ever plan to go Full Frame, you must go DG as DC lenses only work on crop frame cameras.
EX lens, I believe are Aspherical, and are generally smaller and lighter.

[bhop]

You mention you like low light photography. If you'll be using a tripod, then the OS isn't necessary. If you're going to be hand holding the camera, then OS is the way to go. I have the non-os Sigma and it's great, but when the light got a little lower, it was harder to avoid camera shake without mounting it on something. I haven't had as much of an issue with that since i've switched to the Nikon VR, I assume the Sigma OS works in a similar manner.

If you plan to ever use a Sigma Teleconverter, you MUST have the APO lens and they will not work on non-APO lenses.
Some people love OS (Sigma's Image Stability), I seldom use it.
If you ever plan to go Full Frame, you must go DG as DC lenses only work on crop frame cameras.
EX lens, I believe are Aspherical, and are generally smaller and lighter.

Both the lenses he mentioned are the same (DG EX APO), just one has OS (stabilization)

[rgregory1965]

Both the lenses he mentioned are the same (DG EX APO), just one has OS (stabilization)

Yup what he said...

EX means Excelence, any lens that is EX carries a 4 year warranty instead of the standard 3 year.

[HughGuessWho]

You mention you like low light photography. If you'll be using a tripod, then the OS isn't necessary. If you're going to be hand holding the camera, then OS is the way to go. I have the non-os Sigma and it's great, but when the light got a little lower, it was harder to avoid camera shake without mounting it on something. I haven't had as much of an issue with that since i've switched to the Nikon VR, I assume the Sigma OS works in a similar manner.

Both the lenses he mentioned are the same (DG EX APO), just one has OS (stabilization)

I understood the question to be what all of the nomenclatures meant.

[lonewolfsx]

You mention you like low light photography. If you'll be using a tripod, then the OS isn't necessary. If you're going to be hand holding the camera, then OS is the way to go.

The OP actually says specifically that he won't be doing low light work.

So if sports is the primary subject here I'd say the non-OS version is the better choice, but I'd test the new version optically if you can. Since it has OS (basically forced decentering), I'd expect the borders to be a little more out-of-whack but the center sharpness may be better as it is a more modern lens design.

As for the nomenclature, "EX" is Sigma's professional grade lens line, nothing to do with aspherical or not (though I'd figure many of those lenses contain those elements).

[bhop]

The OP actually says specifically that he won't be doing low light work.

My bad.. I misread it. In which case, save some cash and get the non-os version.

[HughGuessWho]

Per the Sigma website;
"EX (EX Lens) The exterior of this lens is EX-finished to denote the superior build and optical quality, and to enhance its appearance"

[rgregory1965]

Per the Sigma website;
"EX (EX Lens) The exterior of this lens is EX-finished to denote the superior build and optical quality, and to enhance its appearance"

Excellence

[virustai]

I owned an OS version and it is great lens. Not sure about the non OS version

[Bukitimah]

You need a very steady pair of hands to shoot above 100 mm without OS and tripod. More so if the subject is under low light and you need to lower your shutter speed. Always good to have it and switch off if you don't need. Of course the co sideration is the price. I once owned a non VR and I had alot of problem at long range. Once the VR comes in, it makes a world of different

[HughGuessWho]

You need a very steady pair of hands to shoot above 100 mm without OS and tripod. More so if the subject is under low light and you need to lower your shutter speed. Always good to have it and switch off if you don't need. Of course the co sideration is the price. I once owned a non VR and I had alot of problem at long range. Once the VR comes in, it makes a world of different

True enough, however, the OP stated that they will seldom be shooting in low light and will be shooting a lot of "sports photography".
I shoot a 70-200 non-image stabilized lens outdoors a lot, oftne times at 200mm and seldom use a tripod. Its all about the about shutter speed and proper hand holding technique. In addition, image stabilization does little or no good when shooting fast moving subjects.