Testing out new Sigma 70-200 F2.8

[eccs19]

Went out and about for a walk. Trying out my new Sigma 70-200 F2.8. Silly me, to test is out, I try shooting something new for me. Hockey, soccer, and some Street stuff. Here's what I came up with.

 

[D-B-J]

They seem sharp enough, but they are rather underexposed. Especially the soccer shot.

 

[pen]

So what do you think of it as this lens is high on my want list?

 

[WilfordSy]

The images look pretty sharp! Nothing really took my fancy in terms of composition. The best one for me would be the soccer shot although it does look like its a little underexposed.

This lens is also on my list although I don't have any plans on buying it soon. (Need to save money)

 

[eccs19]

I've really only had the lens for a week, and this was really the only "real" world test I've done so far, but it definitely is nice and sharp. I did a few shots just around the house with flash, and you can see every freckle on my sons face in detail.

 

[2WheelPhoto]

Congrats on the lens purchase

 

[pen]

Keep us posted on the findings then as that lens is about $800 less then the Nikon.

 

[MLeeK]

Did you get the Macro version or the OS? I have the OS version and I LOVE it!!! I want to replace my Tamron with the macro version so bad I can taste it!
THe images are definitely sharp, but rather dark. Is your monitor calibrated?

 

[honoryourlife]

So what do you think of it as this lens is high on my want list?

I own this lens as well, and I find it to be amazing. I don't use it too often compared to my Canon 24-70mm f/2.8, but I like it a lot better than Canon's version of the 70-200 and it's $1,000 cheaper! And its not white, which I love. The white lenses are far too noticeable.

 

[DiskoJoe]

I love my sigma. I have the old 70-210 version but its still a great lens. You do have to watch the focus when wide open. The 2.8 has a tendency to just miss focus points but the bokeh is awesome with the 9 blade aperture. Works best stopped back to f4 - 5.6. They also lose a bit of sharpness past about the 150mm zone.

 

[eccs19]

So far I'm liking the lens. I'm heading down to NYC to the big photo show this week, and meeting up with some other photographers, and will be doing a walk, so I expect this will give the lens a good work out. So far the focusing seems nice and accurate from what I've seen. If it can focus decently in crappy lighting situation like a hockey arena, then I expect it should do great in normal conditions. I got the macro version, as my Pentax has image stabilization built into the body, I didn't want to spend the extra for the OS version. Any reading I did, it wasn't worth it in the Pentax line because of this. For a heavy / longer FL lens, it's nicely balanced, and not to hard to hand hold, and I'm not a big guy. I'm very impressed with the focus speed of it, especially when in continuous focus mode. It goes from infinity to 5 feet in a split second, and catches focus easily.

 

[MissCream]

So far I'm liking the lens. I'm heading down to NYC to the big photo show this week, and meeting up with some other photographers, and will be doing a walk, so I expect this will give the lens a good work out. So far the focusing seems nice and accurate from what I've seen. If it can focus decently in crappy lighting situation like a hockey arena, then I expect it should do great in normal conditions. I got the macro version, as my Pentax has image stabilization built into the body, I didn't want to spend the extra for the OS version. Any reading I did, it wasn't worth it in the Pentax line because of this. For a heavy / longer FL lens, it's nicely balanced, and not to hard to hand hold, and I'm not a big guy. I'm very impressed with the focus speed of it, especially when in continuous focus mode. It goes from infinity to 5 feet in a split second, and catches focus easily.

Good to know about the focus sped, this lens will be my next purchase Or a K-5

 

[skieur]

According to the tests the Tamron 2.8 70 to 200mm is better.

skieur

 

[eccs19]

So far I'm liking the lens. I'm heading down to NYC to the big photo show this week, and meeting up with some other photographers, and will be doing a walk, so I expect this will give the lens a good work out. So far the focusing seems nice and accurate from what I've seen. If it can focus decently in crappy lighting situation like a hockey arena, then I expect it should do great in normal conditions. I got the macro version, as my Pentax has image stabilization built into the body, I didn't want to spend the extra for the OS version. Any reading I did, it wasn't worth it in the Pentax line because of this. For a heavy / longer FL lens, it's nicely balanced, and not to hard to hand hold, and I'm not a big guy. I'm very impressed with the focus speed of it, especially when in continuous focus mode. It goes from infinity to 5 feet in a split second, and catches focus easily.

Good to know about the focus sped, this lens will be my next purchase Or a K-5

You should have got the K5 a few weeks ago. Henry's had it on sale for $999.99

 

[eccs19]

According to the tests the Tamron 2.8 70 to 200mm is better.

skieur

It may depend on what it's mounted to. With the Pentax, the Tamron uses the bodies screw drive vs the Sigma has it's own focusing motor. I tried both lenses, and the Tamron is cheaper than the Sigma, but IMO, the Tamron wasn't built as nicely as the Simga, and I found the Tamron hunted for focus a lot compared to the Sigma, but I believe optically they are very close to each other.