SIGMA 70-200 2.8 vs Canon 70-200 2.8 IS

Discussion in 'Photography Beginners' Forum' started by sinjans, Dec 14, 2009.

  1. sinjans

    sinjans TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Newfoundland, Canada (yes by')
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    What does everyone think of these two lenses? Is Canon worth the price? Pros an cons pawleeze. I have been dying for the canon for a while now and wondering will i stay pleased with the sigma.
     
  2. Dao

    Dao No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,252
    Likes Received:
    418
    Location:
    St. Louis
    It is hard to say if it worth the price or not since it varies from person to person. However, you can take a look at this article which compares the Canon with the Sigma and the Tamron version.

    Juza Nature Photography
     
  3. Overread

    Overread has a hat around here somewhere Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Messages:
    23,099
    Likes Received:
    3,765
    Location:
    UK - England
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    This review might interest you:
    Juza Nature Photography

    The big part I notice is that the Sigma has no OS (optical stabalization - IS in canon talk) which can be well worth having for when your shooting at the 200mm end and in less than ideal lighting whilst handholding.

    I also have a 70-200mm f2.8 IS L but I never compared it to a sigma 70-200mm f2.8

    Edit - Darn it Dao!!!!!!!
     
  4. sinjans

    sinjans TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Newfoundland, Canada (yes by')
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Well i did not realize that there was no OS. Cheers
     
  5. Dao

    Dao No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,252
    Likes Received:
    418
    Location:
    St. Louis

    kee kee kee kee kee :mrgreen:
     
  6. Dao

    Dao No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,252
    Likes Received:
    418
    Location:
    St. Louis
    I think it really comes down to the cost of the lens and whether you are going to use it a lot of time.

    I look at the photos I took in the past, most of them were taken with focal length shorter than 100mm. Occasionally, I will use my EF 70-300mm IS lens especially when I went to the zoo. But I really do not use the longer range telephoto lens enough to justify the cost of a 70-200mm IS lens.

    But of course, your miles may vary.
     
  7. rufus5150

    rufus5150 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    1,658
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    For its price point, the sigma 70-200 is an excellent lens in both construction and optical ability. I use it professionally for everything from sports to portraits and it's capable.

    It's not an 2.8 L-IS, it's about 85-90% of the L non-IS in terms of IQ.

    It's also very heavy, but so is the 2.8L IS.
     
  8. chip

    chip TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2009
    Messages:
    377
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Cypress, CA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I would get the Canon with IS. For a telephone zoom IS is handy to have! If you can't afford the 2.8L get the 4.0L, either way with IS. Canon is having a rebate until Jan 15th. $150 instant rebate for the 70-200 2.8L IS and $75 rebate for the 70-200 4.0L IS.
     
  9. sinjans

    sinjans TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Newfoundland, Canada (yes by')
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Yeah i would'nt have bothered starting this thread if i knew the sigma would'nt stabilize images. I guess now its between the canon 2.8 vs 4.0 both with IS. Man i need more money
     
  10. Big Mike

    Big Mike I am Big, I am Mike Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2003
    Messages:
    33,821
    Likes Received:
    1,811
    Location:
    Edmonton
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    That's what I usually say about the top Sigma/Tamron lenses. They are 85-90% as good as the similar Canon/Nikon lenses...but at half the price.
    So is that extra 10-15% in quality, worth the extra cost? To some people yes, to others it's not.
    A lot of it is just the mental aspect of knowing that you have the best one which means you don't have to wonder if you could have gotten a better shot, if only you had bought the better lens.
    That was, at least, part of my justification for getting the 70-200mm F2.8 L IS.
     
  11. sinjans

    sinjans TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Newfoundland, Canada (yes by')
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit

    I like that Big Mike. Right on the money
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page
canon 70-200 is ii vs sigma 70-200 os
,
canon 70-200 is vs sigma 70-200 os
,
sigma 70 200 os vs canon 70 200 is
,

sigma 70 200 vs canon 70 200

,
sigma 70-200 2.8 vs canon 70-200 2.8
,
sigma 70-200 os vs canon
,

sigma 70-200 os vs canon 70-200

,

sigma 70-200 os vs canon 70-200 is

,
sigma 70-200 vs canon
,
sigma 70-200 vs canon 70-200