Sigma 70-200 f2.8 choices

sbeecroft

sbeecroft

Suspended / Banned
Messages
175
Name
Stephen
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi, I am currently looking at purchasing a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 lens, my dilemma is that I don't know which version of the lens to buy. From my understanding, although this is difficult with all of the letters sigma put after their lenses is the difference is the Optical Stabilisation.

I am looking at second hand as well as new prices and it seems the OS lens second hand is at an around the price of without OS new.

Also there appears to be 2 versions of the lens which complicates matters.

So basically what I am asking is has anybody got these lenses and whats peoples recommendations?

Thanks in advance.
 
Pft, how can you not understand it?! Chronologically they go:

70-200 EX
70-200 EX DG
70-200 EX DG Macro
70-200 EX DG Macro II
70-200 EX DG OS

And they seem to randomly sprinkle 'HSM' throughout the designations as well, despite all having it anyway :D

I had the "70-200 EX DG Macro", and I thought it was great. I came from an IS/OS lens, and it was tricky at first but I soon got the hang of it. I now use a 300mm lens with no stabilisation and it's really not too bad. What do you shoot? OS is useful in some situations, but it won't help freeze action of course.

Chris
 
Thanks,

I think my issue is that when people are selling these lenses, particularly secondhand the combination of letters after the lens can sometimes vary even for the same product.

I want to use it mainly for shooting sports inside a sports hall. Maybe for some portraiture as well. So do i take from what you say that the OS isn't necessary for the action shooting?
 
That can be an issue, if you have a look you can spot the differences, you just need to know where to look! For example, the very old 70-200 has a totally different pattern on the zoom and focus rings, making it look very different. The next one up just has 70-200 EX DG on it, the macro has 'Macro' printed just next to the 'DG', and similarly for the macro II. If all else fails, get a photo of the box, that should have the complete designation on it.

In a sports hall, you're going to need a high shutter speed to freeze the action. If your shutter speed is low enough for IS to be on benefit, then you're going to be getting pretty bad motion blur anyway. Just my view though, others will probably disagree!
 
we've got 2 of the "macros" (macro in the lose sense of the term, read that it has a lower min focus distance) and we're more than happy with them.

OS isnt necessary for sports unless youre in to low shutter speed panning. it wont help you freeze action.
 
Have you looked at Canon 70-200mm f/4L? Cheap and sharpest thing ever.

I buy my gear second hand but wouldn't touch a used sigma even with a barge pole. There are many stigma lemons, and they usually go in round the circulation.
 
daugirdas said:
Have you looked at Canon 70-200mm f/4L? Cheap and sharpest thing ever.

I buy my gear second hand but wouldn't touch a used sigma even with a barge pole. There are many stigma lemons, and they usually go in round the circulation.
Click to expand...

Depending on the sports hall, surely that's just going to be a recipe for motion blur? I was struggling with a 5DII and f/2 a few weeks ago, granted it was in a pretty dim hall.
 
daugirdas said:
Have you looked at Canon 70-200mm f/4L? Cheap and sharpest thing ever.

I buy my gear second hand but wouldn't touch a used sigma even with a barge pole. There are many stigma lemons, and they usually go in round the circulation.
Click to expand...

I have five second hand Sigma lenses all of which are superb copies. The only second hand lens I had a problem with was a Canon with a sticky auto focus motor.

I have the Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 EX DG which I use for sport. The OS isn't needed at all, even for panning shots.
 
Is the Canon 70-200 F4 comparable with the Sigma 70-200 F2.8 for low light, I understand the overall picture would be sharper, but would that extra stop advantage of the Sigma make that much difference?
 
sbeecroft said:
Is the Canon 70-200 F4 comparable with the Sigma 70-200 F2.8 for low light, I understand the overall picture would be sharper, but would that extra stop advantage of the Sigma make that much difference?
Click to expand...

I am not sure what you are shooting so it is difficult to judge.

Canon is about as sharp as it gets right from f/4. Sigma does seem softer, particularly over 135mm. Sigma is 2x faster if that makes the difference, but I wouldn't use it at 200mm, at least the ones I've seen.

If it comes to indoors sports, I'd be taking my 85mm f/1.8 or perhaps looking for 135mm f/2 AND camera with high iso capabilities.
 
daugirdas said:
I am not sure what you are shooting so it is difficult to judge.

Canon is about as sharp as it gets right from f/4. Sigma does seem softer, particularly over 135mm. Sigma is 2x faster if that makes the difference, but I wouldn't use it at 200mm, at least the ones I've seen.

If it comes to indoors sports, I'd be taking my 85mm f/1.8 or perhaps looking for 135mm f/2 AND camera with high iso capabilities.
Click to expand...

Not so.

My sigma is easily as sharp as my canon primes and I wouldn't even consider using my 85 1.8 over the sigma for indoor sports, which it excels at, it's a superb lens.
 
Last edited:
All though people will disagree my 70-200 sigma is best lens I ever bought and use it on my 1d for shooting horse jumping and also indoor karate gradeings really sharp! I'll post some pics up later if I get a chance, and paid £450 second hand but was like new :)
 
agree with jim, both of our sigmas are sharp all the way up to 200mm. and personally i wouldnt go anywhere near indoor sports without a 2.8 even being able to shoot up to iso6400 on the 1dmk3.

also for the record on 2nd hand sigmas, one of our 70-200's is 2nd hand, also my 120-300 and my 50mm are all amazing performers. at least 2nd hand if you are worried about duff copies you can request example shots from that lens before buying.
 
I have the MKI 70-200mm f2.8 and I it is sharp all the way through. So good I went on to buy the 100-300mm f4, 12-24mm and 50-500mm.

Have also had the 50-150mm HSM, 70mm and 180mm macro lenses .. all have been/are excellent.
 
Well I have gone today and bought a Sigma 70-200 F2.8 II APO EX DG Macro. Thanks for all of the replies and advice to help make the decision.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top