Forums


Go Back   The TrekEarth Forums >

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 11-27-2006, 05:05 PM
davecall's Avatar
davecall davecall is offline
TE Newbie
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 31
Default Canon 70-200 IS F2.8 versus Sigma 70-200 IS F2.8

Hello all
Now that I've got your attention with that emergency call (lol) I really need some advice. I have a dilemma that is driving me insane.

I have a 400D & am DYING to get the Canon 70-200mm IS f2.8. My sister has it & the results are (more often than not) really, really good.

My problem is the price is ridiculous - between £1100-1500 in the UK. I am going to Cape Town, South Africa, in April & need it for then as I want to take pics of birds, wildlife, scenery etc. I will not have enough money by April & my credit card balance is not looking healthy so my eye has started to wander & has settled on the Sigma 70-200mm f2.8. It is nearly half the price of the Canon so is definitely affordable before April.

Now what I want to know from all you experts out there is:
1. Should I hold out for the Canon & be in some debt or settle for the Sigma?
2. Does anybody out there have experience with one or the other or both?

Very eager to hear yoour opinions.
Thanks very much
David
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-27-2006, 05:20 PM
mlopes's Avatar
mlopes mlopes is offline
TE Expert
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,070
Default Re: Canon 70-200 IS F2.8 versus Sigma 70-200 IS F2.8

I have experienced both... not beeing an expert in long zooms, this is what i can say:

Canon 70-200 IS USM f2.8
+very fast lens :)
+great glass quality
+the IS really works
+it will deliver great final outputs
+superb bokeh
-the size and height
-the white color
-expensive

Sigma 70-200 f2.8
+very fast
+great results
+lighter than canon
+more discrete than canon (all black)
+price
-image quality seems good, but i find the bokeh less smooth than canon's
-(you've mentioned it, but i believe i've tried a non IS version... i think Sigma don't have an IS 70-200) so the lack of IS is a minus due the focal lenth
-don't have an USM motor

---

i don't really know your budget, i think sigma's is a good compromise beetween price and final quality, but i think canon's is the best lens beetween the two.

But please listen to other people, i've tried them but as i've said... it's not my field of expertise.

---

Mario
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-21-2006, 12:36 PM
paulalex32's Avatar
paulalex32 paulalex32 is offline
TE Newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 88
Default Re: Canon 70-200 IS F2.8 versus Sigma 70-200 IS F2.8

I have used Sigma almost exclusively for four years now. I do not have the configuration you refer to, but am very pleased with what I do have (70-300, 18-200 and 105 macro). Here in Taiwan, they are often half the price of Canon and Nikon lenses so they offer me far more options. Instead of having on Canon lens, I can have two Sigmas. I honestly believe that Nikon and, in particular, Canon lenses are unneccessarily expensive. Bottom line, I don't think buying Sigma means you are "settling" for a lens. Rather, you are making a good choice. Also, check out some of the previews/reviews on the net. Cheers!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-22-2006, 06:06 AM
kinginexile's Avatar
kinginexile kinginexile is offline
TE Expert
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,537
Default Re: Canon 70-200 IS F2.8 versus Sigma 70-200 IS F2.8

There is no SIGMA IS for their 70-200. Which is why their price is lower, BUT, about the same, maybe a 100$ less, than the non-IS Canon 70-200. Ask your sister about what the IS does to her pictures, when holding a 3lbs lens at the end of a camera. Unless you have super steady, steely hands, it should grandly help.

The Canon is one of their best lenses, zoom or prime, I would consider Sigma over Canon in other focals (like macro promes), but to me, it's a no-brainer here, however the Sigma is a good zoom as well. you pay and get a superb lens everyone agrees is top of the tops, and graces the shoulders of many top photographers as well.

Give a thought to the new IS 70-200L f/4, from Canon, lighter, cheaper, and top glass as well, with, Canon specs, an extra stop of IS over the 70-200.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-05-2007, 06:01 AM
Furachan's Avatar
Furachan Furachan is offline
TE Expert
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,293
Default Re: Canon 70-200 IS F2.8 versus Sigma 70-200 IS F2.8

Compoletely agree with my compadre Herve here. Do think about the new IS 70-200 F4. Having said that, anyone remember those gorgeous portraits of railway people by Simon, eh? All taken with the legendary Canon 7-200 f2.8.
Bokeh to die for....
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-27-2007, 06:52 PM
rushfan2112's Avatar
rushfan2112 rushfan2112 is offline
TE Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 460
Default Re: Canon 70-200 IS F2.8 versus Sigma 70-200 IS F2.8

David,

Image stabilisation only gives any benefit whatsoever if what you are shooting is still. If you are shooting a moving animal (bird flying, etc) then thelens is just an f2.8 lens like any other.

If, on the other hand, what you are shooting is sat still, the image stabilisation will remove some of the shake from your hands - making it possible to get blur-free (oe lower blur) images at slower shutter speeds / narrower apertures.

I have the original one-touch Nikkor 80-200 f2.8 and it is as sharp as a pin. I also have the new 70-300 f4.5 VR (vibration reduction) lens - which is superb - but no better than the non-VR 80-200 f2.8.

Sigma also make damn good lenses. I'm thinking about getting a 300mm f2.8 this year and it's a toss-up between getting the Nikkor at £3,500 or an independent make at half that price. I suspect I'll be going down the independent route.......
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-28-2007, 10:45 PM
borka's Avatar
borka borka is offline
TE Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 49
Default Re: Canon 70-200 IS F2.8 versus Sigma 70-200 IS F2.8

quick q : what does IS and USM and EF stand for?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-31-2007, 09:01 PM
rushfan2112's Avatar
rushfan2112 rushfan2112 is offline
TE Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 460
Default Re: Canon 70-200 IS F2.8 versus Sigma 70-200 IS F2.8

David,

"IS" is "image stabilisation". It's the Canon equivalent of Nikon's "VR" or "vibration reduction". The lens is fitted with a motorised self-levelling device (sort of gyroscope, I presume) to reduce the effect of the movement of your hands at slower shutter speeds. It won't stop moving objects blurring - but it will help if what you're shooting is stationary.

"USM" (I think) stands for something like "Ultra-Silent Motor" it's a very fast and quiet focusing mechanism that helps the camera snap onto whatever you're trying to get in focus.

I'm not sure what EF is.

Hope this is some help.

Paul.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-01-2007, 02:43 AM
borka's Avatar
borka borka is offline
TE Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 49
Default Re: Canon 70-200 IS F2.8 versus Sigma 70-200 IS F2.8

Thanks a lot Paul!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-01-2007, 05:13 AM
AdrianW's Avatar
AdrianW AdrianW is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,596
Default Re: Canon 70-200 IS F2.8 versus Sigma 70-200 IS F2.8

Also the Sigma equivalent of IS is called OS.

USM = Ultra Sonic Motor

EF is the current Canon lens mount - and apparently stands for "Electro Focus"

Personally I'd buy the Canon - why? Well in my experience, the Sigma lenses aren't as well put together, and their service isn't as good. Perhaps I was unlucky though.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:36 AM.



Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.
explore TREKEARTH