 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / September 2005Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 vs Canon 70-200mm f4 L
Hi guys, I'm thinking about purchasing a lens to replace my Sigma 18-200mm f35.-5.6 DC, which although a pretty capable lens, I've found it's very soft at the long end. I'd like to replace it with something that gives me sharper images. I've narrowed it down to a choice of two lenses, the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG or the Canon 70-200mm f4 L lens. According to www.WarehouseExpress.com the Canon 70-200mm costs £487.00 and the Sigma lens costs £649.99. However, Canon don't include the tripod collar with the L lens and this costs an extra £89.00, while the collar is included with the Sigma lens. So the comparison is really £578 for the Canon vs £649 for the Sigma. I know that Sigma lenses have a bit of a reputation for incompatibility with newer Digital EOS Camera's however personally, I've had no problems with the current 18-200mm lens. Also if the lens is relatively new, it can be re-programmed usually. I'm wondering though, is it worth spending the extra to get faster Sigma glass or does the Canon "L" glass just blow it away? -- Regards, JasonB jasonb <jasonb@nospam4.me> wrote in news:qoVSe.4494$ix3.2497 @fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk: > I've narrowed it down to a choice of two lenses, the Sigma 70-200mm > f/2.8 EX DG or the Canon 70-200mm f4 L lens. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > collar is included with the Sigma lens. So the comparison is really > £578 for the Canon vs £649 for the Sigma. But the Canon lens is lighter and doesn’t really need the tripod collar. > I'm wondering though, is it worth spending the extra to get faster Sigma > glass or does the Canon "L" glass just blow it away? Everything of read on these lenses says that both are very sharp and you probably can’t tell the difference in sharpness. The Canon is cheaper, lighter and has the Canon name. The Sigma is 1 stop faster, but dearer, heavier and bigger. The best choice probably depends on whether you need the f2.8 or not.  SignatureMark Heyes (New Zealand) See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 5-September-05) "The person on the other side was a young woman. Very obviously a young woman. There was no possible way she could have been mistaken for a young man in any language, especially Braille." Maskerade > The Canon is cheaper, lighter and has the Canon name. > The Sigma is 1 stop faster, but dearer, heavier and bigger. > The best choice probably depends on whether you need the f2.8 or not. The other thing to consider is resale valve, the sigma won't be worth anywhere near what the canon lens will be if you decide to sell it at a future date. SignatureStacey > Hi guys, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I've narrowed it down to a choice of two lenses, the Sigma 70-200mm > f/2.8 EX DG or the Canon 70-200mm f4 L lens. Canon + Collar = no regrets and a reasonable resale value. Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. It kinda surprises me that even in this day that Sigma still have some 'build concerns' with their EX series lens. T. > It kinda surprises me that even in this day that Sigma still have some > 'build concerns' with their EX series lens. They have "build concerns" with all of their products - and always have. >>It kinda surprises me that even in this day that Sigma still have some >>'build concerns' with their EX series lens. > > They have "build concerns" with all of their products - and always have. The real concern Sigma have is that one day Randall Ainsworth will endorse one of their products and ruin his impeccable reputation for never having said a kind word about the brand, despite their 70~200 f2.8 being a better lens than it's Canon counterpart. But let's not let the facts stand in the way of good gripe! SignatureDouglas, My name is but a handle on the doorway to my life. > The real concern Sigma have is that one day Randall Ainsworth will > endorse one of their products and ruin his impeccable reputation for > never having said a kind word about the brand, despite their 70~200 f2.8 > being a better lens than it's Canon counterpart. But let's not let the > facts stand in the way of good gripe! I'm not the only one to post messages here ripping Sigma. But let me go on record: I will *NEVER* purchase a Sigma product. I've been doing photography since 1966 and have watched the products of Sigma and other companies. They have consistently produced sub-par products aimed mostly at amateurs who are too cheap to buy OEM. >> The real concern Sigma have is that one day Randall Ainsworth will >> endorse one of their products and ruin his impeccable reputation for [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Sigma and other companies. They have consistently produced sub-par > products aimed mostly at amateurs who are too cheap to buy OEM. What an ignorant snob you are. Sub-par? Hahahaha... Sigma makes some excellent well-priced lenses (see its EX range) which are sometimes better, often equal but always cheaper than Canon's offerings. Canon too has many QC problems with its L lenses too - read the various web sites. For example, the Sigma 70-200 EX f2.8 is about a third of the price of the Canon 70-200 f2.8 L and yet is very well built and is optically as good. What nutter is going to pay Canon way over the odds and get the same? A: snob who is too blinded by marketing bs to see the truth. I have the money to buy Canon L but choose not to do so since I see no advantage to me. Canon's waterproofing is one reason fro some to buy L but that only makes sense if you use a 1 series camera too. > What an ignorant snob you are. Sub-par? Hahahaha... Sigma makes some > excellent well-priced lenses (see its EX range) which are sometimes > better, often equal but always cheaper than Canon's offerings. Canon too > has many QC problems with its L lenses too - read the various web sites. > For example, the Sigma 70-200 EX f2.8 is about a third of the price of the > Canon 70-200 f2.8 L and yet is very well built and is optically as good. About 2/3 the price of the equivalent Canon. It's one third the price of the IS model, which isn't a fair comparison (as the Sigma model doesn't sport OS). Also, the Canon has one more glass element that adds a little length and weight than the Sigma. Regarding 'the reviews', there is a not insignificant number of Sigma owners who found the optical quality to lag the Canon. But, personally, I will be better off buying a new Sigma from a retailer and returning it under warranty if it has an optical quality issue. Dave >> What an ignorant snob you are. Sub-par? Hahahaha... Sigma makes some >> excellent well-priced lenses (see its EX range) which are sometimes [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Dave I did say 'about a third'. Looking at Jessops UK, Sigma £600 Canon with IS £1450 - let's say 2.5 times the price. A significant wad of money. In any case, their lenses are not meant to be exactly the same but basically fulfil a similar function. So, if you need IS, then the price hike is what you need to pay. But £850 for IS and you say an extra element is a little over the top for something most do not need and certainly not at 2.5 times the price. Also, I defy anyone to tell images apart. As far as I can see from the Canon UK site it only sells the IS version and of course the f4 one. I use the Sigma 100-300 EX f4 which is a lens Canon (i.e. 100-300) does not make since it is happy selling the 70-200L IS with either a 300L or a TC and so makes even more loot. Most reviews in mags etc which I have read have them pretty much equal optically with the Sigma better at the long end and the Canon at the short. I see Sigma has just introduced a DG version. It will be interesting to see if it performs any better. It is wise for any purchase to buy sensibly. Lenses are so problematic - both cheap and expensive, Canon, Sigma etc - that buying where you can return after testing is essential and worth paying a little more for. I can't imagine 7dayshop or some Hong Kong store being too keen on exchanging/refunding for a lens which is say left-side soft. >>The real concern Sigma have is that one day Randall Ainsworth will >>endorse one of their products and ruin his impeccable reputation for [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > But let me go on record: I will *NEVER* purchase a Sigma product. Suit yourself. I've one Sigma lens & consider it a good value (good quality at reasonable price). It gets the job done, and has held up well in use. [...] -- Douglas, My name is but a handle on the doorway to my life. Seems there is a bit of snot on it. --f you >> Hi guys, >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Canon + Collar = no regrets and a reasonable resale value. Went down to local Jessops today to buy the Canon 70-200mm F4L only to find that they had none in stock. Apparently, Jessops UK have 85 of them on backorder with 150 expected to be delivered from Canon anytime in the next 2-3 weeks. Guess I'll have to either buy it from WarehouseExpress or wait for Jessops to get more stock in. Really wanted to try it out with the camera before purchasing.... -- JasonB <snip> > Went down to local Jessops today to buy the Canon 70-200mm F4L only to > find that they had none in stock. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Jessops to get more stock in. Really wanted to try it out with the > camera before purchasing.... Meant to add, the salesperson did try and flog me a 70-200mm F2.8L but at £1,700 can you guess my response? -- JasonB |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.