Choice of lens Canon 70-200mm L f/4 or Sigma 70-200mm f2.8?

R

russdaz

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,930
Edit My Images
Yes
SO i have upgraded the camera to a 30d from a 350d, i have been asked by a couple of team's to take pics of them racing, so as i want to continue and start earning some money back, which of the lens's above would you choise for motorsport work? As the focal lengths there woudnt be quite long enough they would be bolted to a TC of some decription.

Would those lens's out perform my current Sigma 50-500mm at anything above 300mm as there f/stop would be the same?
 
Someone is undoubtedly going to say that you should look to the Canon 70-200mm f2.8IS but I'm guessing your budget won't stretch that far hence no mention of it? Out of the two lenses you've mentioned, although I don't have any personal experience of either, I'd personally go for the Sigma purely for the extra stop. The experience I have had of Sigma lenses tells me that their EX range are superb - I'm currently using two of the shorter lenses in that range and am hugely impressed with both. even with a 2x TC though you'll still be 100mm short on that 50-500 - sure that's not going to be a problem?
 
I have been looking at the 70-200mm is but it is well outside my budget unfortunetly.

I have seen a 70-200mm f2.8 L non is that i may be able to stretch to, but i wouldnt be able to get the TC for a while.

I wouldnt be getting rid of the 50-500mm, just not sure if the 2xTC would be worth getting on either. I would imagine those lenses and the 1.4x TC would yeild better results upto 280mm then the Sigma 50-500mm.
 
I've been happy enough with mine with the 2x - in fact used it on holiday a couple of times with both TC's stacked and was fairly astonished by the quality even then!

If you're going to get a non IS anyway then you may as well have the Sigma and save a few £££'s - to be honest so long as you get a sharp version I really can't see there being an appreciable difference between the quality - Sigma seen to be VERY on the ball with IQ now.
 
Which is what i was thinking, hense the Canon 70-200mm f2.8 not being mentioned. The only that gets me with the sigma is i am getting dust build up on the inner lens of the 5-500mm, the canon 70-200mm is rated as dust and water resistant isnt it? and can be had for nearly £200 less more orless the price of the extender. I have heard that the Sigma needs stepping to it at its best, the Canon f4 doesnt. But having never used either i am not sure, hence asking here.

I am very tempted with Canon f4 due to the motorsport aspect with lots of dust at times, and being used in rain etc.
 
Hmmm...the weathersealing aspect is a good point - must admit I'd not considered that. You'd have the same issue as I do that it would only be weathersealed as far as the camera body of course, but I guess like me you've discovered that the 30D seems remarkably weather-tolerant anyway! Mine's been out in absolute downpours now with no ill-effects whatsoever!

I don;t know a lot about the 50-500mm but I think I'm right in saying that even with the F4 lens & TC you'd be no worse off for light than you would be with that? with the 1.4x it would be f5.6 I believe? But, of course, considerably shorter. When I got my TC's from Kerso I paid about £185 each for them, less the cashback that was on offer at the time.
 
between 200-400mm its 5.6 and 6.3 from 400mm on the 50-500mm, so theres real advantage in f/stops on the new lens, unless there considerable sharper then the current one.

Never had the 30d out in the rain yet, been sunny so far lol, but i have a rain cover for the body, but it'll be nice for a lens that wasnt effected by the dust, save on having it cleaned Sigma.
 
Joe T said:
The only reason for going for the Canon would be if you need to keep the weight down? If not, get the Sigma for the extra stop. :)
Click to expand...

Weight i couldnt care about that its lighter then my current one.

That stop really worth that much? Hope that dont sound to silly dont forget i have only been around cameras just over a year, got my first mid April last year, so still havent the experince with diferent lenses.
 
I've actually got them both :shrug:

The F4 is lighter, very quick focussing, it's not weathersealed (only the F2.8 IS has that) lovely bokeh, and very sharp.

The sigma is heavy, very very sharp, great in low light, not weathersealed. I don't care for the finish on the sigma, the rubberised coating's wearing off on mine but it does get some pretty rough treatment.

The extra stop on the sigma is a real benefit. I was using the F4 today and had to go to ISO 500 in reasonably good light to keep the shutter speed up.

Bottom line is they're both great lenses, neither will let you down so the choice really comes down to whether or not you think you'll need F2.8
 
Oh ok thanks, i was under the impression all L-glass was weather sealed

And being used 99.9% of the time for motorsport only. then i think the very very sharp low light sigma wins.

unless any-one can argue for the canon f4
 
russdaz said:
unless any-one can argue for the canon f4
Click to expand...

:p 70-200mm F4L from today

ML1W3556.jpg
 
oh very nice indeed lol

not sure again lol, but i do need something good in low light even with a TC fitted.
 
More so with a TC fitted as you lose one or two stops in doing so.
 
russdaz said:
not sure again lol, but i do need something good in low light even with a TC fitted.
Click to expand...

In that case the sigma gives you the headroom you need. :)
 
TBH thats what i have been thinking all along, i was just noticed that the Canon f4 was cheaper then the Sigma earlier today. If it wasnt for the fact i want to take this to earn money then i think Sigma with a 1.4TC has to be the one togo for.

If i am not mistaken the TC will work with my 50-500mm to?
 
I have the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 and the 1.4x tc

I haven't managed to try it on the 5d yet as i'm loving the wide angle the 17-40 is giving me now, but on the 20d the images from the Sigma were very sharp and the lens focused fast!

I certainly haven't regretted getting the Sigma instead of the Canon IS version which was a valid option at the time of purchase.
 
I think you've got your decision there! :) I'd not realised that not all L glass was weathersealed I must admit - I'd just, like you, assumed that it was. Learn something new every day!
 
Yeah there you go thats why it goes to ask these questions on places like this before so you can make a better choice. Just making notes of numbers to call see if i cant get some deal on buying the lens and 1.4TC as a package. If anyone has any good links please feel free to post them up them up.

(if thats allowed)
 
I too have recently been through this dilema....

f4 or 2.8... IS or not.....

I went for the canon f4 IS version in the end.....

I think the IS is more valuable than a single aperture stop...

think of it this way......do you honestly belive that you will use the 2.8 wide open..at 200mm you have a very narrow depth of field.

where as with the 2 mode IS (normal and panning) you can shoot wide open...get razor sharp images and realisticly shoot at 1/25th (handheld) of a second and still get a good hit rate in terms of sharpness..( and that is only 3 of the claimed 4 stop range)

Oh and this version is weather sealed..... and is cheaper than the sigma with the current cashback offers.

one of the sharpest lenses(if not the sharpest) canon currently make.....period.

if your not sure have look at the ISO charts here...

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-4.0-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx


Or here...

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_70200_4is/index.htm


And from what ive seen Canon lenses hold there value better when its time to upgrade....



Dave P....


PS once youve tryed IS there is no going back...
 
Oh interesting cheaper from where, just noticed that version but its £100 pound more then the sigma. IS would be handy for some things that it may get used for.

Shall give them a bell in the morning see what i can get.

Your right tho i wouldnt ever really go lower the 4-4.5 tbh lets see if theres any stock around at a good price.
 
ive used the 70 - 200 f4 70 - 200 f2.8 is L and the sigma one which is my current after moving to nikon. Yeah yeah there is another brand apart from canon. Out of the three i love my sigma but i found the f4 the nicest to use. its a case of personal choice at the end of the day
 
TBH the name part isnt any concern to me i ahve had 2 sigma's in the past been very happy, and nearly brought the sigma 70-200mm f2.8 without a thought for the canon models.

I just require the best lens for my money based on the fact i shall be employeed to take pics in a couple off weeks so need need the better lens regardless of brand.

Think those reviews on the IS may have swayed me to the Canon IS version now.
 
ive got the 70-200hsm ex macro sigma with teh ex 1.4 TC and i reallllllllly like it..
IMG_1571.jpg
 
DavePotter said:
Oh and this version is weather sealed..... and is cheaper than the sigma with the current cashback offers.
Click to expand...

Oops, forgot about that one :bonk:
 
Well the deed is done. But what did i go for in the end?

Needless to say being single does have a bennifit at times, and this is one off them times.
 
OKhad a quick play, and thought id just update you all.

I was going Sigma all the way until Daves links. After reading the reviews on the IS f4 i was swaying to the canon, f4 until the very last part of the review that mentioned the f2.8 for sports and thinking low light conditions combined with TC use i went with a good, but bank balance bursting 70-200mm F2.8 IS complete with a 1.4 TC. A test setup proves the lens is much sharper then then my current Sigma at identical settings upto around 260mm. Shall see how well she rates at the track side at the weekend.

Thanks to all those that posted there view's and opinions much appriecatied.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top