Compare 70-200L with sigma 70-300


Status
Not open for further replies.

Denosha

Senior Member
Dec 25, 2003
1,287
0
36
Bukit Timah
www.sgl.per.sg
#3
Mmm.. I think it would be resonable to compare the Sigma 70-200 EX with the Sigma 70-300 since the price is slightly more comparable (the sigma 70-200EX is about 1/2 the price of the canon 70-200L?).

Anyway, you mean better in what way? Absolute mage quality? Price/performance ratio? Compactness/weight? Speed?

Anyhoo.. OT here abit: I think the Sigma 70-200 F2.8 EX HSM is a very good substitute for the Canon 70-200L F2.8 if you don't have the $$$ to plunk down. Just my $0.0002. :D
 

Newman

New Member
Mar 2, 2003
943
0
0
TBC
#4
Just saw in Aug issue of Photography Monthly that Nikon's 80-200mm/f2.8 and Sigma's 70-200mm/f2.8 fared better than Canon's 70-200mm/f2.8L IS. :(
 

rainman

New Member
Apr 4, 2004
1,314
0
0
39
In my own world
#5
probably I should as in more details....

I'm actually looking into several aspects..like sharpness contrast and compatbility with TC. price wise we all know the difference lah :) I'm more concern with the optical quality. Any1 here can say it loud that sigma 70-200 2.8 is sharper than the L lens?
 

dkw

New Member
Dec 10, 2003
1,051
0
0
CCK
Visit site
#6
rainman said:
probably I should as in more details....

I'm actually looking into several aspects..like sharpness contrast and compatbility with TC. price wise we all know the difference lah :) I'm more concern with the optical quality. Any1 here can say it loud that sigma 70-200 2.8 is sharper than the L lens?
Heh Heh! Obviously won't slam my own L-lens (70-200/2.8IS), but I will say that I had owned the Sigma 70-200/2.8, and would absolutely NOT have traded it in if not for the IS. It was a fabulous lens, sharp, fast focussing, well built, great contrast and colour. If you don't need IS, and can find a good copy (heard that there are some lemons out there), it is great value for money and one of the BEST lenses available for the EF mount, regardless of price.
 

Ah Pao

Senior Member
Nov 7, 2003
1,662
0
36
Singapore
www.facebook.com
#7
Hmm...you're comparing a $350 lens with another that costs almost 10 times as much...and no prize for guessing which one is which...

The 70-300mm Sigma is a poor man's telephoto zoom lens. If you want to compare it should be the 70-300mm Sigma with the 75-300mm Canon...
 

rainman

New Member
Apr 4, 2004
1,314
0
0
39
In my own world
#8
Ah Pao said:
Hmm...you're comparing a $350 lens with another that costs almost 10 times as much...and no prize for guessing which one is which...

The 70-300mm Sigma is a poor man's telephoto zoom lens. If you want to compare it should be the 70-300mm Sigma with the 75-300mm Canon...

yah lah...i mean since u say the price is 10 times diff..then I should expect 10 times difference in the quality loh....

probably I should make a trip to the camera shop and justify for myself...:)
 

rainman

New Member
Apr 4, 2004
1,314
0
0
39
In my own world
#11
majere2sg said:
Get a prime. You will be blown away by its sharpness :D

Yah prime is good...but lazy man like me dun like to carry too many lenses...keke

anyone know how much is the latest 28-300 L IS?
if less than 2 k can consider :) of cos the quality must be good also lah since it is a L lens
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom