Canon 70-200IS + Ex 1.4 or 2.0 vs Sigma 80-400 OS


Status
Not open for further replies.

TheRecorder

New Member
Apr 17, 2004
15
0
0
Hi Everybody,
I am v keen on the canon 70-200 IS lens but the price is too steep. The sigma 80-400 OS is quite affordable.

Can anybody who has this sigma lens share your comments and post some pics?

Appreciate if anybody can tell the price of this sigma lens and where to get.

Thanks
 

dkw

New Member
Dec 10, 2003
1,051
0
0
CCK
Visit site
Greetings,
don't have the Sigma but you should really try to do a search on dpreview.com or fredmiranda.com, a wealth of user opinions there, much more than you can get on CS (since they have a much larger subscriber base).

Cheers,
 

Amfibius

Deregistered
Jan 26, 2004
508
0
0
49
Perth
I tested the Sigma 80-400 OS. This is a 100% crop of a picture which was taken at 400mm, F/5.6, 1/1000s, handheld, on a Canon EOS-10D. Focus point was on the Jaguar badge (which was also the center of the image). No post processing has been applied apart from levels and crop:


Click for original


As you can see, the image is acceptably sharp. Unfortunately I did not get a chance to compare it to my 100-400 IS.

I did not buy the lens because AF was a REAL DOG. Even in bright daylight, the lens would hunt and hunt and not be able to fix focus. To make matters worse, AF speed is slow (despite HSM).

The 70-200/2.8 IS + 2x is a bit soft at 400mm, and needs to be stopped down to F/11 before it is comparable to the 100-400 IS. But then, short of going primes, nothing compares to the 70-200 IS up to 200mm in terms of sharpness.

Your best single lens compromise to get to 400mm would be the 100-400 IS. If you have a lot of money, consider the 70-200/2.8IS and a 400/5.6L prime, or even a 300/4 prime + 1.4x.
 

2100

Senior Member
Mar 3, 2004
3,589
0
0
51
Amfibius said:
I
I did not buy the lens because AF was a REAL DOG. Even in bright daylight, the lens would hunt and hunt and not be able to fix focus. To make matters worse, AF speed is slow (despite HSM).

The 70-200/2.8 IS + 2x is a bit soft at 400mm, and needs to be stopped down to F/11 before it is comparable to the 100-400 IS. But then, short of going primes, nothing compares to the 70-200 IS up to 200mm in terms of sharpness.
Think it's due to gearing. Same thing for the Nikkor 80-400VR. So i guess things won't improve much with a pro body because the problem is speed and what the pro bodies are good with is torque. It's designed to be slow.
 

dkw

New Member
Dec 10, 2003
1,051
0
0
CCK
Visit site
Amfibius said:
I tested the Sigma 80-400 OS. This is a 100% crop of a picture which was taken at 400mm, F/5.6, 1/1000s, handheld, on a Canon EOS-10D. Focus point was on the Jaguar badge (which was also the center of the image). No post processing has been applied apart from levels and crop:

As you can see, the image is acceptably sharp. Unfortunately I did not get a chance to compare it to my 100-400 IS.

I did not buy the lens because AF was a REAL DOG. Even in bright daylight, the lens would hunt and hunt and not be able to fix focus. To make matters worse, AF speed is slow (despite HSM).

The 70-200/2.8 IS + 2x is a bit soft at 400mm, and needs to be stopped down to F/11 before it is comparable to the 100-400 IS. But then, short of going primes, nothing compares to the 70-200 IS up to 200mm in terms of sharpness.

Your best single lens compromise to get to 400mm would be the 100-400 IS. If you have a lot of money, consider the 70-200/2.8IS and a 400/5.6L prime, or even a 300/4 prime + 1.4x.
The Sigma does NOT have HSM, that's why its so slow to focus;

--> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=9077203
--> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=9073409
--> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=8835730

As for the poster's original question about using TC to extend the reach of 200mm, try this article -->

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/400v400.shtml

Cheers,
 

Amfibius

Deregistered
Jan 26, 2004
508
0
0
49
Perth
dkw said:
The Sigma does NOT have HSM, that's why its so slow to focus;
Sorry, my bad. At least my independent opinion squared with theirs ;)
 

TheRecorder

New Member
Apr 17, 2004
15
0
0
Thank you guys for your kind assistance.
 

clive

Senior Member
Oct 9, 2002
2,536
0
0
Visit site
recommend u try the EF400/5.6L for "best bang for the buck" pure 400mm. no IS but with good light and modern low noise ISO800 u can still get good pics. [me also wan2 get one leh..keke! =) ]
 

Status
Not open for further replies.