Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 OS Sport & 70-200mm f/4 OS Contemporary Rumors Make the Rounds Again

[Canon Rumors Guy]

<a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/sigma-70-200-f-2-8-os-sport-sigma-70-200-f-4-os-contemporary-coming-cr1/">Back in early December</a> we had a [<a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/the-canon-rumors-rating-system-explained/">CR1</a>] report that Sigma would be releasing two new 70-200mm lenses.  It looks like <a href="http://www.nikoneye.com/">other sites are picking this up today</a> as new information or perhaps further confirming the initial report. No additional information has been provided by any of the new report, so I think this is just a case of recycling.</p>


<p><strong>We were told the following Sigma lenses would be coming:</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG OS Sport</li>
<li>Sigma 70-200mm f/4 DG OS Contemporary</li>
</ul>
<p>We have not received any further confirmation that Sigma would be announcing these lenses ahead of CP+, so this remains a [<a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/the-canon-rumors-rating-system-explained/">CR1</a>] rumor for now.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>

 

[MrFotoFool]

Considering the reportedly stellar performance of the new Tamron G2 lens, I have a hard time understanding why anyone would choose a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 over the Tamron option. A Sigma f4 is more understandable (since Tamron does not offer one), but it would have to be substantially cheaper than the Canon f4L.

 

[slclick]

If Canon would update the f/4 IS it would be very attractive to many shooters. True it would cost the same as the G2...

 

[aceflibble]

Considering the reportedly stellar performance of the new Tamron G2 lens, I have a hard time understanding why anyone would choose a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 over the Tamron option.

The running theme so far is Tamron's new lenses are the best all-round, while Sigma are the best specifically for optical quality. There are lots of people who don't care about Sigma's less accurate AF and weaker sealing (especially studio shooters), so there is absolutely a market there.

If Canon would update the f/4 IS it would be very attractive to many shooters. True it would cost the same as the G2...

While not impossible to update, it'd cost them a lot and the areas they could improve are few. Transmission could certainly be better and of course the IS could be updated to quieter version... but other than that, it's basically already as good in terms of optics, AF, and build quality as you're going to get from a first-party f/4 zoom, unless they were to also up the price quite a bit.

It'll be updated eventually, of course, but now is not the time.

 

[slclick]

Considering the reportedly stellar performance of the new Tamron G2 lens, I have a hard time understanding why anyone would choose a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 over the Tamron option.

The running theme so far is Tamron's new lenses are the best all-round, while Sigma are the best specifically for optical quality. There are lots of people who don't care about Sigma's less accurate AF and weaker sealing (especially studio shooters), so there is absolutely a market there.

If Canon would update the f/4 IS it would be very attractive to many shooters. True it would cost the same as the G2...

While not impossible to update, it'd cost them a lot and the areas they could improve are few. Transmission could certainly be better and of course the IS could be updated to quieter version... but other than that, it's basically already as good in terms of optics, AF, and build quality as you're going to get from a first-party f/4 zoom, unless they were to also up the price quite a bit.

It'll be updated eventually, of course, but now is not the time.

Now is not the time? Because 12 years is too early yet how many on this site want a 7D3 or a 5Dsr after just a couple years? Please back up your now is not the time statement with , well, something. Coating have greatly improved, IS is light years better than in 2006, engineering plastics are much lighter and stronger. Canon will put out 9 different 70-300's yet it's absurd to dream of a followup to a lens which has had only one iteration? (I'm not including the non IS of course)

 

[wsmith96]

Though I’m not interested right now, I do like to see what sigma comes up with next. They’ve been producing some fantastic lenses over the last few years. I don’t doubt that these will be able to produce fantastic image quality.

 

[SkynetTX]

I would be interested in a new Sigma f/2.8 if it has less focus breathing and a similar price than the Tamron G2. It's not a problem if it's less sealed and has a bit less accurate AF or only 4-stops stabilization.

 

[Drainpipe]

All these quality 70-200 lenses have me seriously wondering if I HAVE to have the Canon version. Sigma has made big strides lately, I’m hoping this lens will be the same.

 

[mb66energy]

Your statement about the necessity to update the EF 70-200 4.0 L IS USM "Now is not the time? Because 12 years is too early ..." is right and wrong at the same time in my opinion.

Generally there is some strong progress in a lot of areas so you are right: A lot of things which were produced 12 years ago can profit from enhancements.

On the other hand: Sometimes products are a decade ahead from their competitors and are state-of-the-art 10 years after introduction. The EF 70-200 4.0 L IS USM is maybe such a product which tops the non-IS version optically plus sports IS plus has enhanced "weather" resistance. It shows the capability of 24 MPix APS-C sensors from f/4.0 and makes the 5D classic a real 13 MPix image recording system - each pixel counts. ( I own both lenses and the IS version has replaced the non-IS so I have to sell the non-IS which was very good indeed for EOS 40D @ 10 MPix APS-C).

Considering the reportedly stellar performance of the new Tamron G2 lens, I have a hard time understanding why anyone would choose a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 over the Tamron option.

The running theme so far is Tamron's new lenses are the best all-round, while Sigma are the best specifically for optical quality. There are lots of people who don't care about Sigma's less accurate AF and weaker sealing (especially studio shooters), so there is absolutely a market there.

If Canon would update the f/4 IS it would be very attractive to many shooters. True it would cost the same as the G2...

While not impossible to update, it'd cost them a lot and the areas they could improve are few. Transmission could certainly be better and of course the IS could be updated to quieter version... but other than that, it's basically already as good in terms of optics, AF, and build quality as you're going to get from a first-party f/4 zoom, unless they were to also up the price quite a bit.

It'll be updated eventually, of course, but now is not the time.

Now is not the time? Because 12 years is too early yet how many on this site want a 7D3 or a 5Dsr after just a couple years? Please back up your now is not the time statement with , well, something. Coating have greatly improved, IS is light years better than in 2006, engineering plastics are much lighter and stronger. Canon will put out 9 different 70-300's yet it's absurd to dream of a followup to a lens which has had only one iteration? (I'm not including the non IS of course)