Canon 70-200 f/4 or Sigma 70-200 f/2.8?

[Deli]

Hello everyone, I need some advice on which which lens to buy. I need a zoom lens and I found two that are about the same price ($450). The reason I need this lens is for weddings. I was also thinking about the canon 85mm f/1.8 instead because I love the prime lens. I already own the 50 f/1.4 and sigma 30 f1.4


Thank you

 

[robbins.photo]

Well I shoot Nikon as opposed to Canon, but I'm a big fan of my Sigma 70-200 mm F/2.8. I've always gotten excellent results with mine, and I think 2.8 would probably make a big difference to you considering some of the lighting conditions your liable to run into.

I also have an 85 mm 1.8, and boy do I love that lens - the Nikon AF-S G version is simply amazing - again I don't shoot Canon so I can't speak to their version but I can tell you it's a great focal length for a prime. Of the two I'd probably go for the 70-200 mm first, and get the 85 later. The zoom would give you more versatility. Just my 2 cents worth of course, YMMV.

 

[Rob_]

Before I made the jump to Fuji I debated for months on the variety of 70-200 lenses. I'll summarize my research and conclusion.

Do you need/want weather sealing? If yes, just go all out and get the Canon 70-200 2.8 II. Why? I'll explain.

Tamron 70-200 2.8 - Great lens, great reviews, great price, but people complain you're not getting a true 200mm on the long end, and it's soft at 200mm.

Sigma 70-200 2.8 - No weather sealing, not as sharp.

Canon 70-200 F/4 non IS - GREAT LENS, I owned it myself, amazing for landscape, too heavy for portraits in low light.

Canon 70-200 F/4 IS - Great lens! I actually almost jumped on this but didn't because it's not 77mm, I didn't wanna spend cash on filters, and for a few hundred bucks more you get the 2.8.

Canon 70-200 2.8 non IS - Thought long and hard on this, decided against it because it's too close in price to the version II with weather sealing, and I think Canon no longer supports it.

Canon 70-200 2.8 II - It's as close to perfect as you're going to get in quality, it's expensive as hell, but it's glass and it will stick with you for years to come, so it's a solid investment.


In conclusion you might be able to live with some of the short comings of the other lower priced lenses, and that's fine. For me personally, I figured why compromise? Just spend the cash, get the best and forget about everything else. I am not loaded, so yes, I'd struggle to buy that lens, but in the long term I know I'd be completely satisfied.

 

[jaomul]

I think you misread the OP. ^^

450 won't buy any Canon 70-200 f2.8. Also I would be careful of Robbinsphoto advice, his 70-200 is the one with OS (he may confirm ). I imagine for 450 the siggy your looking at has not OS. This older siggy is not supposed to be quite as good as the newer one, and that Canon is ome of their best zooms. If you have a crop sensor which I assume you have (seeing that you have the 30mm f1.4)you may find the F4 doesn't give you enough light or shallow dof. I'd say the Canon will ultimately give better images when light is good, but the siggy will allow you get photos where you would otherwise struggle. I'd go signa

 

[ronlane]

If you don't need it for low light stuff, I'd go with the Canon, just because, as others have said, it's one of Canon's really good ones.

After re-reading the OP, you will most likely need the f/2.8 for weddings, because you are going to probably be shooting in low light. However, I'm not sure that I would recommend the Sigma over the Canon f/2.8. (Not the mark II) Yes, it is about a grand more, but remember, that as with most things, you get what you pay for.

 

[robbins.photo]

Optically the older non os lens rates as high if not higher than the OS version from what I've seen on the sites that test such things, and while I would recommend the os version over the non os it is quite a bit more expensive. With a budget of approximately 450 the os version really isn't an option.

So I stand by my recommendation.

Sent from my LG-LG730 using Tapatalk

 

[jaomul]

Optically the older non os lens rates as high if not higher than the OS version from what I've seen on the sites that test such things, and while I would recommend the os version over the non os it is quite a bit more expensive. With a budget of approximately 450 the os version really isn't an option.

So I stand by my recommendation.

Sent from my LG-LG730 using Tapatalk

Good stuff so. I thought your one was the better one. I wasn't putting down your advise, just recommending to OP to be sure that the advise was for the lens they were checking. On a re read my post sounds rude but was not meant to be

 

[Derrel]

I would rather have the Canon f/4, the pre-IS, 67mm filter model, than an old Sigma that is probably slow to focus, and crappy at f/2.8. If the Siggy is $450, it is almost surely one of the late 1990's/early 2000's models which were not very good wide-open, and which retailed NEW for $749-$799 in the George W. Bush years.

 

[Dao]

I have both the older Sigma Sigma Lens: Zooms - Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM APO (Tested) - SLRgear.com! ($350 used) and the Canon f/4 non IS ($450 used)


- The Sigma is heavier than the Canon.
- The Sigma is relatively soft at wide open (f/2.8) @200mm. Stop it down to f/3.2 or f/4 yield better result.
- If I am going to shoot at f/4 or above, I will for sure bring my Canon instead. That lens is sharper than the 1st gen Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS at f/4 (Only the newer f/2.8 II lens and the f/4 IS are better). Of course, I will bring the Sigma when shooting with a wider aperture is needed.
- Canon f/4 filter thread is smaller than the Sigma and it the same size as my Tamron 17-50mm (I can share filters between the 2 lenses)
- AF speed are not bad on both of them. HSM vs USM
- For Zoo photos, no doubt the Canon will be my choice since I do not need to shoot at f/2.8 and the Canon is lighter.
- But personally, I like black lens over the Canon white lens. White lens draw too much attentions.
- Canon lens has less likely to have issue with future Canon camera bodies. (The newest Sigma maybe able to address such issue since it has the capability of firmware update via the Sigma USB lens dock)
- If the Canon and the Sigma cost the same and in similar shape, I will pick the Canon instead even it is a f/4 lens (only 1 stop difference)

I pick up that Sigma simply because I may be in a situation need f/2.8 at 200mm and I believe I can sell it back to the market for around the same price I bought it for if I do not like it.

 

[Deli]

Thank you everyone for the advice. Sorry I've been busy so I haven't had time to post. I offered the guy $350 on the sigma, hopefully he accepts the offer but if he doesn't then I'll probably just get the canon.


Thanks again everyone,
Deli