Probably most of you here swear by Canon's 70-200L IS II, and for excellent reasons. From numerous forum posts here I can understand this is one of the best zooms produced, period. But I am not looking for any more info about Canon's offering. What I am looking for is personal experience of those of you who might be using the Sigma 70-200 OS. It would be great if any of you actually used both the Canon and the Sigma. Would you please care to share your opinions and experiences? I am not a professional photographer, so justifying buying the Canon is almost impossible for me. The similar offering from Tamron does not yet have OS/VC/IS. So it would be a great help to learn from your opinions and experiences about the Sigma lens. Thank you all in advance.
Sigma 70-200 OS
- Thread starter RAKAMRAK
- Start date
- Status
RAKAMRAK said:
Haha, I was just about to create this thread of my own but saw yours. I am in the same boat as you. I am also looking at the Sigma 70-200 OS because Canon's offering is a bit too expensive for me right now. However, I am mainly concerned about these areas
1) Image Quality
2) Build Quality
3) AF sync with Canon's body. Is there any noticeable difference when trying to get a lock on your subject using the Sigma compared to Canon's version.
Upvote
0
I have the OS and love it, sure it can be sharper at 200mm even stopped down, but I got it for portrait and events/wedding so that's not a major concern. The stabilization works as it should, and some claim it to be just as good as the Canon and I can believe that. As for sharpness wide open it's definitely sharp, it may need some AFMA and should be good for anyone. The bokeh is my favorite with this though, very smooth and creamy, and gets somewhat swirly.
Focus speed is silent and fast as others will say, but the Canon is faster. And you might miss the weather-sealing, although that either matters or it doesn't, for me not really. Best part was I got this under 1K, and I chose this over the 70-200 2.8 non IS, the Sigma beats that
I'm on a crop body for this
Focus speed is silent and fast as others will say, but the Canon is faster. And you might miss the weather-sealing, although that either matters or it doesn't, for me not really. Best part was I got this under 1K, and I chose this over the 70-200 2.8 non IS, the Sigma beats that
I'm on a crop body for this
Attachments
Upvote
0
When researching the two (I eventually went with the Canon), I found Digital Rev's review very helpful:
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 OS HSM vs Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 OS HSM vs Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM
Upvote
0
RAKAMRAK said:
It might be just a marketing response to what Sigma itself must realize is a perception that they lack QC, BUT they did recently make a big deal about addressing that. They re-released this lens in an "updated" form less than 2 years after releasing the last version. And to much accompanying hoop-la about a new system of QC.
I wish Sigma could get its crap together and be what they could be. Sigma could really be the one 3rd party/2nd tier outfit that advances to the 1st tier Canon/Nikon/(Sony?) level. (I'd include Pentax and Oly on 1st tier if they had more DSLR market share) Sigma makes their own cameras, not just lenses. It is a large company. They should/could be much better thought-of than a company like Tamron, Tokina, etc., but for now they remain lumped in together with 3rd party outfits on that level. If they really can get a handle on QC, and then convince everyone that they have done so, then they could be a catalyst that pushes Canon and Nikon to innovate faster while keeping a check on prices too.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
