# Canon 70-200 f2.8 II or Sigma's 70-200mm f2.8?



## beckstoy (Apr 23, 2012)

I got my 5DM3 (freakin' LOVING it!) and now I'm looking into some more great glass. I just figured that I'd save up for the Canon version of this lens (70-200 f2.8 IS II USM) but found the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 APO EX HSM OS and wanted to know if anyone owns this lens and what they think of it?  Any regrets?

I see LOTS of reviews (all very positive) for this camera, but one that said the non-weather sealing (which the Canon lens has) might make a big difference.

Is the $1,300 in savings worth it? I figured that I might just put that extra chedda into another Prime. What are your thoughts?


----------



## ashmadux (Apr 23, 2012)

you may not even be able to focus properly with that sigma.

Pay the money.

That is all


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 23, 2012)

You can see images taken with the two here with a FF Camera. At 200mm wide open, it looks pretty bad, fuzzy even. Not so bad at 70mm. Still lots of CA in the corners at 135mm.

Get the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 non IS, it beats the Sigma handily on FF. Refurbs are $1159 from Canon, they go in and out of stock frequently. I just sold mine today for $1100.


----------



## beckstoy (Apr 23, 2012)

Thanks for the comment on the focus issues. Reading the reviews I'd have never known that - there are a lot of people marking out to the Sigma!

And that's a good idea about the non IS version. It's very tempting, but I know I'll end up wanting the IS. 

I'll just book an extra job or two to pay for the IS version of the Canon.


----------



## mws (Apr 23, 2012)

I've never used the Sigma, generally I find they make good lenses for the money. I do have the Canon, and it is hands down one of the best lenses on any system ever. Worth every penny.


----------



## D_Rochat (Apr 24, 2012)

mws said:


> I've never used the Sigma, generally I find they make good lenses for the money. I do have the Canon, and it is hands down one of the best lenses on any system ever. Worth every penny.



Agreed. The Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II is nothing short of spectacular.


----------



## Ryant (Apr 24, 2012)

Check out this site to compare image quality:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx

Choose the lens on the left that you want to compare to on the right. Mouse over the image to compare quality. I know this is not the end all be all test, but I have found its fairly accurate.

With all that said I own a canon 70-200 2.8 II and I find that its my sharpest quickest lens I own. I also have a 24-70 2.8 and 50 1.4. I love the lens, but find I dont use it that much. I find I use the 24-70 and 50 95% of the time.


----------



## The_Arsonist (Apr 24, 2012)

I own the Sigma 70-200 OS APO HSM EX...whatever, haha. I can't say much about performance on FF, but on my crop 50D the image quality is quite nice. I've shot quite a bit with it for indoor basketball games, and the auto-focus is generally about the same performance level as what I get with a 100mm USM F/2 in the same situation.
I do think you will get what you pay for, but as the Canon is generally twice the $950 I paid for the Sigma, I'm willing to settle for the Sigma. If you want a nice 70-200 2.8 with IS, then the Sigma is great. If you want the sharpest image and best focus capabilities, then better start saving up for the Canon.


----------



## tron (Apr 24, 2012)

The Canon 70-200 2.8 IS II by all means...


----------



## brianwallace21 (Apr 24, 2012)

A few comments

1) Don't use "the-digital-picture.com" comparison tool - they haven't tested the new OS HSM version of this lens and the sample crops they have are from the previous versions.
2) I own this lens and I did extensive microfocus adjustment tests and you know what I had to do? Nothing - squat nothing. I have an older Sigma 120-300 f2.8 HSM lens and the improvement in the autofocus system in the newer Sigma lenses is quite apparent
3) I've gotten great shots with this lens, +1.4x TC, and even +2x TC. I love it and wouldn't consider selling it. 


I would recommend you rent both and compare them - then make a decision. People can post all the sample photos they want but the only way to know for sure is to rent them and shoot them in identical conditions.


----------



## FrutigerSans (Apr 24, 2012)

I have used both the Sigma 70-200 OS HSM and the 70-200 Mk2.

In my personal opinion - the Canon is sharper at all relevant apertures than Sigma, but this is MOST noticeable only in the corners. At the centre it is VERY very close, after f3.2. At 2.8 it is noticeable but only if you compare side by side. For a lens that cost 45% of the Canon(here in Singapore), the Sigma performs VERY well. 

I’ll like to point out also that the differences are really pretty minor for the part of the frame you likely will use, so if price is a big problem for you then the Sigma will save you a pretty penny.

Some things to note about Sigma’s focusing implementation.
1. Speed is almost the same as canon, with a slight edge to canon if I have to pick a winner.
2. Both are equally silent
3. Sigma does not have a focus limiter, so in lower light, at long range it will seem to hunt longer than the canon as it will hunt the full range, rather than the canon which will only hunt across the limited range. This to me is the main reason why many people feel the Canon focuses faster. If you turn off the focus limiter on the canon, both will hunt for pretty much the same amount!
4. Sigma’s Stabiliser Mode 2 for panning doesn’t detect orientation, hence panning mode only works in landscape mode, while the Canon works in both landscape and portrait panning.

If you can live with these caveats, I guarantee you will LOVE this lens like I did. I eventually kept the sigma and used the extra pennies to grab a Sigma 85 1.4 which is SUPERB and without peer for its combination of IQ and speed. That prime is now my favourite lens!


----------



## jVillaPhoto (Apr 24, 2012)

By all means, for the Canon version for sure! The IS in that thing is incredible, and sharp as my Gillette razor heads(before being used lol). Okay, stupid analogy, but seriously you will definitely not regret it. I've taken shots at its full range around shutter speeds of 1/30 and found it to be sharp with little to no camera shake.


----------



## Jakontil (Apr 24, 2012)

U should get 70-200 MKII mate.. Bestncombo with MKiii


----------



## beckstoy (Apr 25, 2012)

Thanks everyone! I'm going Canon.


----------



## tron (Apr 25, 2012)

You will not regret it. In addition there might be incompatibility issues with 3rd party lenses in the future (just like the issues I
had with a Tokina ATX28-70 f/2.8 and a Sigma 14mm which I can use only on analog Canon bodies...


----------



## D.Sim (Apr 25, 2012)

If you've already spent all that on the Mk3... why go for 4th best? The 2.8IS II is by far the better choice over that soft marshmallow of the Siggy...


----------

