Canon 70-200 f4 L vs Sigma 70-200 f2.8 EX

[andante]

Sorry if this is a repeat thread. I thought I saw a thread on this subject a few weeks back, but now I can't find it.

Has anyone directly compared these two lenses (Canon 70-200 f4 L vs Sigma 70-200 f2.8 EX)? They are almost the same price.

I am trying to decide which one to buy.

There are some great reviews of the Sigma and it is a stop faster. One review I read says the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 is better than the Canon 70-200 f2.8 L ! Do these people work for Sigma? Here is a link to the review http://www.naturephotographers.net/mg0600-1.html

Help me make a rational decision. And please don't try to talk me into the Canon 70-200 f2.8 L. I'm not that rich .

Thanks

 

[aungzawwin]

....... One review I read says the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 is better than the Canon 70-200 f2.8 L ! ...

i'm afraid it would be agreed by many users :think:..

anyway, if you are ok with a stop slower, the L is the better choice i suppose..
i owned and used the IS version of this f4L lens.. it was fantastic..
light weight, less obtrusive than bulky Sigma in many situations, optically excellent even at f4..
resale value is also higher than Sigma i think..(this is important to me personally.. i'd like to change my stuffs from time to time )

 

[yc2005]

You should look at the comparison here: the-digital-picture

 

[alphabeta93]

for me i would go for the sigma. 2.8 is always better....

 

[andante]

You should look at the comparison here: the-digital-picture

Thanks for the site!
Does anyone have any photos to compare?
I've seen some from flickr. Both looked really good for my eyes.

 

[enzeru21]

Yes f2.8 is nice to have, but if you consider that sigma being a third party lens then its more value to get the canon one.. higher resale value, and less likely to have compatibility issues or other problems.

get the f4 with IS lor.. then no need to worry le..

 

[Yoh]

Don't get the wrong idea that 3rd party lens will always lose out on the resale value than the ones from manufacturers such as Canon. The level of depreciation is almost the same and bear in mind that Canon L lenses have production code which many will use it as a bargaining factor to bring down the price if its considered old.

As for the compatibility issues, Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 lens shouldn't have any problem with existing DSLRs. One thing to note is that Sigma lenses are known to produce slightly warmer image than its competitors.

f/2.8 is pretty useful in low-light condition (within acceptable limits) than f/4. f/2.8 can stop down to f/4 but not vice versa.

Visit this site for images.

 

[gymak90]

If you're on a tight budget, i suggest you get the sigma. The f2.8 is very useful. It may not produce the sharpest of images, but it's definitely a worthwhile lens.

 

[knpan]

get a good copy of the Sigma 70-200 and u will be damn happy enough. F4 vs F2.8 is alot of difference in low ligh conditions. Unless u need blazing fast AF speed and reaction time, then canon list is the choice.

If you're on a tight budget, i suggest you get the sigma. The f2.8 is very useful. It may not produce the sharpest of images, but it's definitely a worthwhile lens.

U are really wrong, sigma's Ex lenses are superiorly sharp to the original makers too, only backdown is that their HSM is not as fast as reviews say etc.
I used to use the Nikkor AF-S 80-200 2.8 and the Sigma 70-200 2.8 HSM (1stversion).
Boy, I have to admit that the Sigma 1 was way sharper than the AF-S 80-200. The AF-S 80-200 was crap at wide open from 135mm onwards, rather unpleasingly soft @ 200mm widest open. While the Sigma, the more I Zoom towards the end, the image get extremely sharp at the longest end wide open. I have no ideabut this is what I experienced.

 

[andante]

Thanks for all the advice!

Is there anyone who has own this lens has had to calibrate the lens?

I was reading some forums and there were feedback about this lens having the problem of front focusing.

 

[Yoh]

Thanks for all the advice!

Is there anyone who has own this lens has had to calibrate the lens?

I was reading some forums and there were feedback about this lens having the problem of front focusing.

No calibration was needed for my case when I used 'em.

 

[icelykoh]

Thanks for all the advice!

Is there anyone who has own this lens has had to calibrate the lens?

I was reading some forums and there were feedback about this lens having the problem of front focusing.

heard that some of the sigma lens need to calibrate too..
but my sigma 70-200mm work just fine(to me) so i dun bother about need-to-calibrate or not..
><"

i think its better to try out the lens yourself and see which lens your fingers prefer..
and i'll suggest you to get F2.8 lens if you're into low-light photography..

 

[andante]

I'm more or less steered towards the sigma now.