any thoughts on the new sigma 70-200 2.8?

Discussion in 'Photography Equipment & Products' started by tarilynquinn, Aug 26, 2010.

  1. tarilynquinn

    tarilynquinn TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    I was thinking of getting the new sigma 70-200 2.8 after reading this review:

    Unique Photo: Lens Review: Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 OS DG HSM

    but i'm not sure if i should go for the old one or this one. the sharpness of the new on at f/8 is pretty remarkable, especially on that model's pix.

    any suggestions?
     
  2. Tappout

    Tappout TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    56
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Round Rock, TX
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Too Expensive...for close to the same $ you can get the same Nikkor (if you shoot Nikon). The Nikkor 70-200 is a gem in their product line.

    But I am curious to see what non-biased shooters have to say about it.
     
  3. Idahophoto

    Idahophoto TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2010
    Messages:
    389
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    I live in Idaho
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    In the market for a 70-200 I am taking a very strong look at it, but have yet to find any reviews. I keep checking DPreview for one, I hope they come through soon.
     
  4. MrLogic

    MrLogic TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2008
    Messages:
    423
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Rotterdam, Netherlands
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    It - the Canon version - isn't exactly flying off the shelves.

    As a biased shooter (aren't we all?) I can't say I'm impressed with the sample images in the link the spammer (thread starter) posted.

    From the review:

    Sharpness: Overall I was highly impressed with the sharpness of this lens. At f/2.8 there is a high level of sharpness that improves as the lens is stopped down. I would say this lens is at least as sharp as the original Nikon/Canon 70-200mm VR/IS variants if not a bit sharper. While I didn't directly compare the Sigma to the Nikon/Canon VRII (most recent) versions, I have used both lenses on separate occasions and I would say the Sigma is worthy of being mentioned in the same breath as those two lenses. The build quality isn't up to par, but the optics seem to be.


    From the same review -- the new Sigma at 200mm and f/2.8:

    [​IMG]


    Canon 1D Mark IV w/ Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 OS DG HSM
    200mm f/2.8 1/400s ISO400




    :meh:







    More sample images:

    APO 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Sample Image Gallery - SIGMA CORPORATION







    Don't hold your breath.
     
  5. Derrel

    Derrel Mr. Rain Cloud

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    35,456
    Likes Received:
    12,796
    Location:
    USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I'd rather own the Nikkor 70-200 VR, version 1, for use on a DX Nikon. I'd rather own the Canon 70-200 2.8 L-IS USM,version 1, for use on a crop-frame Canon. The new Sigma is wildly over-priced for what you get; an over-priced lens, on which the resale value will drop to 50% of what you payed for it within a week of buying it at its inflated new price.

    When the Sigma was $789 and the Nikkor or Canon were $1699 to $1899, the Sigmas were a good value at under eight hundred dollars....but now...not so much...there's no way in Hades that the "new" Sigma price levels are justified for the optical/mechanical/focus speed/resale you'll get for your money.
     
  6. MrLogic

    MrLogic TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2008
    Messages:
    423
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Rotterdam, Netherlands
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Looks like the "reviewer" didn't focus on the eyes. AF all the way, ha/ha.

    The new Sigma may or may not be sharper (read: less soft) wide open than the previous Canon and Nikon 70-200 f/2.8, but I'd rather own those, too, for all the reasons you mention. The Canon and Nikon weren't exactly known for their insane sharpness at 200mm and f/2.8, but still gave quality pictures at that focal length and that aperture, with good bokeh. Hell, I'd rather own the Nikkor 70-200 VR, version 1, for use on an FX Nikon.


    D3S with 70-200 VR I at 200mm and f/3.5:

    http://www.pbase.com/aarif/image/121942724/original.jpg

    thread:

    D3s in Thailand [Page 1]: Nikon D3 - D1 / D700 Forum: Digital Photography Review




    And here's one with the VR II with the new 2x TC attached, at 400mm and f/8:

    http://ic2.pbase.com/o6/21/489821/1/126211134.LKZU7zyA.DSC_0958.jpg



    Does anyone really believe that "the Sigma is worthy of being mentioned in the same breath" as the 70-200 VR II?
     
    Last edited: Aug 30, 2010

Share This Page

Search tags for this page
70-200 vr ii sample images
,
canon 70-200 2.8 portraits
,
d3s
,
nikkor 70-200
,
nikon 70-200mm photo samples
,

sigma 70-200

,
sigma 70-200 2.8
,
sigma 70-200 os sample images
,
sigma 70-200 sample
,
sigma 70-200 samples