# Sigma Ships Its Most Anticipated Global Vision Lens of the Year – The Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 DG OS HSM Sports Lens



## Canon Rumors Guy (Dec 10, 2018)

> *Ronkonkoma, NY – December 10, 2018 –* Sigma Corporation of America, a leading still photo and cinema lens, camera, flash and accessory manufacturer, today announced the pricing and availability of the highly anticipated Sports line addition announced at Photokina – the new flagship large-aperture telephoto zoom Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 DG OS HSM Sports. The new lens to complete the Sigma F2.8 zoom trio, including the award-winning 14-24mm F2.8 DG HSM Artwide-angle zoom and the 24-70mm F2.8 DG OS HSM Art modern workhorse zoom – the essential tools for professional photographers, will begin shipping in Canon mount in late December for $1499.00. The advanced optical formula delivers the renowned Sigma Art image quality inside the rugged, weatherproof build of a Sports lens.
> *Preorder the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Sports lens at Adorama*
> 
> As Jim Koepnick, a leading...



Continue reading...


----------



## M. D. Vaden of Oregon (Dec 10, 2018)

I would buy "native" for my camera. But I look forward to hearing other photographer's reasons why they may choose this new Sigma when the price gap probably isn't too big between the brand that matches their camera. I just faced my first episode of firmware between Tamron and Canon, so I am leaning to 1st party glass more, although acknowledging 3rd party has some nice lenses. This Sigma is about $384 apart from the Canon mk iii version I just price-checked. Cheers, M. D. V. / www.vadenphotography.com


----------



## lexptr (Dec 10, 2018)

Nice! Interesting, how it will compare with the Canon's shameless recolor mark III…


----------



## unfocused (Dec 11, 2018)

M. D. Vaden of Oregon said:


> I would buy "native" for my camera. But I look forward to hearing other photographer's reasons why they may choose this new Sigma when the price gap probably isn't too big between the brand that matches their camera. I just faced my first episode of firmware between Tamron and Canon, so I am leaning to 1st party glass more, although acknowledging 3rd party has some nice lenses. This Sigma is about $384 apart from the Canon mk iii version I just price-checked. Cheers, M. D. V. / www.vadenphotography.com



...and $100 under the Canon MK II CPW Street Price. I think that is a tough sell.


----------



## HarryFilm (Dec 11, 2018)

M. D. Vaden of Oregon said:


> I would buy "native" for my camera. But I look forward to hearing other photographer's reasons why they may choose this new Sigma when the price gap probably isn't too big between the brand that matches their camera. I just faced my first episode of firmware between Tamron and Canon, so I am leaning to 1st party glass more, although acknowledging 3rd party has some nice lenses. This Sigma is about $384 apart from the Canon mk iii version I just price-checked. Cheers, M. D. V. / www.vadenphotography.com



===

On a technical basis, the Sigma Art Series lenses have always been and this Sport Zoom will also LIKELY BE SHARPER from corner to corner versus the equivalent Canon at the same aperture. With the Canon's vs Sigma (got both Canon and Sigma sets of lenses!), I have found I had to stop down the Canon's in order to get the equivalent sharpness. In daylight or with lots of available studio lights, this is NOT A PROBLEM ....BUT.... In hockey arenas, stadiums, concert halls where the lighting tends to be poorly regulated tending to be all over the place, I like shooting with the Sigma Arts and Zooms over my Canon lenses. My Sigma final images ARE DEFINITELY SHARPER versus the Canon images.

This sharpness is VERY IMPORTANT for sports, fast action and moving wildlife! For studio and portraiture I shoot with the Canon 35mm and 50mm and an 85mm which I have to say do have MUCH BETTER LOOKING, more organic Bokeh! In those instances, the ultra sharpness of the Sigma becomes far too harsh! I should note I also use the Zeiss Otus series at 55mm, 85 and 135mm but those are mostly used for outdoor and/or astrophotography where I want the ultimate in full-manual control on a decent tripod and where my action is NOT fast moving! Those are HEAVY lenses and are far more suited for landscapes, city vistas and tripod-mount outdoor/indoor wedding photos!

So....

if you need SHARPNESS (i.e. during sports and fast action), go for the Sigma lenses!

if you need organic, beautiful Bokeh (i.e. street photography/wedding/portraiture/studio), go for the Canon lenses!

if you do Astrophotography or low-light landscapes, go for the Zeiss Otus 55 mm or even better the 28 mm!


----------



## Ah-Keong (Dec 13, 2018)

I was wondering if they would release a f/4 "Art" version for landscapes use where manual focusing can be used.


----------



## Random Orbits (Dec 13, 2018)

Ah-Keong said:


> I was wondering if they would release a f/4 "Art" version for landscapes use where manual focusing can be used.



LOL, it might be as heavy as a f/2.8 lens. Sigma has gone off the deep end on the weight/size of some of their recent offerings (i.e. 105mm prime).


----------



## MrFotoFool (Dec 14, 2018)

First time I have heard someone say Sigma is sharper than Canon. I wonder if others have the same experience?

I am surprised the price difference is so little. It is indeed a very hard sell to get someone to buy third party unless it is significantly less expensive.

The one thing I do like better about Sigma is the black color. I really hate white lenses (even though I bought the Canon version 3 on first release).


----------



## MrFotoFool (Dec 14, 2018)

Followup: I would also be very interested to see comparisons between Sigma Sport and Tamron G2.


----------



## MrFotoFool (Dec 14, 2018)

Followup 2: Assuming Sigma's price is same for Canon and Nikon mounts, this lens might be appealing to Nikon shooters, since their lens is about 700 bucks more than Canon's.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 14, 2018)

It strikes me that the one thing the headline said (Sigma ships...) is the one thing that isn't true. The lens was announced some time ago, and it isn't shipping yet. 

You can announce the ship date, in which case you say something like "Sigma will ship..."

But you can't put out a release that *will* be true in a few weeks, but isn't true now. Very odd. Like a PR schedule was just rolling along despite a delay in reality.


----------



## HarryFilm (Dec 14, 2018)

MrFotoFool said:


> First time I have heard someone say Sigma is sharper than Canon. I wonder if others have the same experience?
> 
> I am surprised the price difference is so little. It is indeed a very hard sell to get someone to buy third party unless it is significantly less expensive.
> 
> The one thing I do like better about Sigma is the black color. I really hate white lenses (even though I bought the Canon version 3 on first release).



---

In the centre of the image circle (i.e. 50% of the total image area) , the Sigma and Canon's are basically the same!

It is the OUTER CORNERS where I have consistently noticed the Sigma's are sharper at wider apertures. You can always stop down on a bright day or use a neutral density filter to reduce that difference. BUT... When I'm shooting at F/1.4 to F/2.8, I want the wider open lens to get all the light I can at Sunset or Sunrise or my Night Shots! Sigma lenses have had an on/off quality control issue in that you MUST TEST the actual lens you are going to buy with a 2400 dpi resolution chart so you can compare between individual Sigma lenses. Canon IS VERY CONSISTENT for ALL of it's L-series lenses. Two Canon lenses will be almost identical in sharpness and bokeh, while two Sigmas will vary, sometimes by quite a lot in my opinion!

However, the Sigma lenses we do have ARE DEFINITELY SHARPER at the same aperture in the corners vs the same focal length Canon's. It used to be that Sigma's prices were so much cheaper than Canon's that if you were careful and TESTED each Sigma lens in-store, you could get a GREAT set of lenses at a GREAT PRICE versus the equivalent Canon. NOW, Sigma is raising prices and IMPROVING its quality control, so the differences are becoming less pronounced as time passes. I still say Sigma is sharper in the corners BUT Canon DEFINITELY has much better looking Bokeh! So again, for in-studio, wedding portraiture and head-and-shoulders shots, use the Canon's!

For my PERSONAL CHOICE at 50mm, 85mm and 135 mm, I pick Sigma for all three focal lengths over the Canon's. At 200, 400 and 600+ mm I would DEFINITELY pick Canon because of Canon's superior build quality and better internal focus mechanisms on such long focal lengths.

HOWEVER, I should also note that on a Bang-for-Buck basis, the BEST sports zoom out there is the Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports Lens for Canon EF. This is an AMAZING ZOOM LENS! I can be at the far end of a football (i,e. Soccer) field and STILL get a fast-action play shot on the opposite Goalkeeper under those usually awful stadium lights! DO NOT get the cheaper "Contemporary" version of this lens -- rather DO GET the SPORTS VERSION ($1800 U.S. for December 2018) -- It is so incredibly GREAT for big field sports and long-range wildlife shots!

See weblink:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1082152-REG/sigma_150_600mm_f_5_6_3_dg_os.html

Another set of lenses if you can afford the $5000 price tag is the Zeiss Otus series which are the SHARPEST LENSES corner-to-corner EVER!
It's a MANUAL ONLY lens but it's sharpness is undisputed.

For the BIG THREE focal lengths of 50mm, 85mm and 135mm which most people will get at the prosumer level, the Sigma is STILL CHEAPER than the equivalent Canons by around 15% to 25% or even more depending upon your country. Just remember to TEST each Sigma you buy personally at the store!


----------



## danski0224 (Dec 15, 2018)

I am eagerly awaiting this lens, in SA mount


----------

