Sigma or Canon?

I am saving some money to buy a Canon 70-200 F2.8L IS, but my question has anyone here has tested or owns a Sigma 70-200 F2.8, the question is how good the quality of this glass against Canon's, because if is the same or similar I won't mind saving me 1K on that glass.

 

Look it up, the reviews are all over the Web. I own it, and i can attest to its quality. A superb piece of glass. But it's heavy and bulky. Not unlike the Canon, especially the IS version.

And the difference is right there, of course. If you have the $$$ for the IS, go for the Canon. If it's between the Canon non-IS and the Sigma, for me the choice is clear - Sigma.

 

FYI The IS on the Canon is outstanding.

 

www.photozone.de has test results on both lenses.

 

I've been reading that Garbz and it's interesting results however they're in a lab shooting at test cards. The don't mention that the Canon is built like a tank that could almost be used under water and they don't include the use of the IS in practical situations.
I agree that the Canon is pricey but looking at the engineering I can nearly justify it, which is easier to do if you get paid in Euros and buy in Dollars (€1=$1.46 atm woohoo, almost 50% discount)

 

This is not at any way directed at Garbz (who is an uber cool person and a big help to us around here) but I don't find lens tests in the lab useful... sure, they can tell you which lens shoots a card (or wall) or whatever better... but they don't tell you the real world info you need to know.

Field tests are much more the thing, in my book.

 

Thanks Mike, thats what I am trying to find out, balance the output, at the end we are striving for a better shot, but for the extra 1K the Canon glass needs to be for me at least 40 to 50% better than the Sigma. Is it?

 

I don't understand why you compare the 70-200 f2.8 IS to the Sigma. Instead of the non-IS version.
Plus, the difference is less than 1K. It's closer to $800. And if you visit B&H now, you'll find a rebate which brings the gap to ~680.

 

Camarada Fidel what I am trying to find out is that if the IS alone on the canon glass worth the 1K extra? or can you get by with out it, and save the extra thousand dollars for another piece of glass.

 

What about longevity?
When I buy something I don't want to buy it twice because it fell apart the first time. Is the Sigma well built? Is it built like the Canon? Can it be used/worked every day and be expected not to fall apart? Maybe you don't need this sort of robustness like fancy dress shoes Vs hiking boots.
That needs to be factored in to the price.