georgeretired Loc: Manitoba Canada

I have been looking at the 70-200 f2.8 for some time and always swaying between the Canon and Sigma. I have a sigma 150-500 so my "reach" is not the goal, it's being able to shoot inside and need the better glass. IS is not a consideration as my shots will be on a tripod. I have many opportunities to shoot at grandchildren concerts, graduations etc. but the lightening is awful and I don't want the excessive ISO. Price difference is about $250.00 with the Canon being more expensive. dPreview shows the Sigma to be a newer make over the Canon.
Would really like some advice or experience any UHH member has had with both or either of these lens so I can finally make that decision. I may also purchase an extension lens to up the reach a bit.
Thanks and best wishes to everyone for a great new year to come.

Photo-Al Loc: Sonoma County, CA

Well, since you narrowed it to Canon and Sigma, I'd see what MT Shooter has to say: he's a big Sigma fan, and his photos are excellent, so ....

If you are open, I'd offer the Tamron SP 70-200 f/2.8. I bought one a few years ago, without IS since I always use monopod or tripod, and there was a significant difference between the price of Tamron and Canon, while most of the ratings between the two were very close, with Tamron even on top in a couple areas. I use the lens for headshots, performance photos, and outdoor nighttime rodeo in small county arenas where lighting isn't especially good. The reach with the aperture wide open is what got my interest, but I was on a budget and the Tamron fit that. I was so pleased that I also purchased a Tamron 200-500 and lately a 24-135. Not knocking Canon, but praising Tamron. Longer warranties, excellent quality, and stunning results.

Good luck in your search.

georgeretired Loc: Manitoba Canada

It took me a long time to go outside of Canon lens as my camera is a 50D to get the sigma. Certainly open to other makes, so I will research you suggestion. Guess my budget is fixed to a point that's why looking at the canon for $1500.00 is a lot to swallow. Sigma is $1200.00
Thanks for your input.

Bill Emmett Loc: Bow, New Hampshire

When you start looking a buying glass that cost over $1000. you really have to look close. I agonized over buying either a Canon EF 24-70mm f2.8L USM (note no IS) for over $2000 or the Tamron SP 24-70mm 2.8 Di VC USD, for about $1300. I read lots of reviews, asked lots of questions on this forum, and others, spoke to a owner of the Tamron, and even looked at a wedding photographers shots. I was sold on the Tamron. You are much luckier than me. That lens has been out for a long time, there are plenty of good reviews, and lots of people who own the lens to talk to. But, when all is said, I'd look at the Tamron. The 6 year warranty to me is a real selling factor when buying new. I now shoot with a 7D as my main camera, and have simi retired the 50D as my backup. BTW, take a look at KEH.com, they sell really great quality used equipment, that is tested and given a warranty. You will save a ton of money there.

georgeretired Loc: Manitoba Canada

Al / Bill....now you both have my attention. I did a search in Canada to our "Henrys' photo" and found the Tamron sat almost $100 over the Canon while the Sigma sits on the lowest price of $1150. Looks like I'm going to ask some heavy questions at the camera shop on Tamron while I do some investigating of my own. Any other members have positive or negative experiences with Tamron especially the 70-200 f2.8

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

The Sigma is $1249 brand new right now. Where are you finding the Canon 70-200mm F2.8 for $1500? Its $2499 new and $1749 refurbished for the older IS version. Are you looking at used? Or possibly even the discontinued non-IS model???
The Tamron is also a pretty good choice and rated highly. I like the Sigma build quality better than the Tamron myself, but both are very good lenses at a very good price.

Victor S Loc: SouthCoast MA

Probably looking at the f4. Correct...the f2.8 is aorund $2400

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

Possible, but my money is that he found someone selling the old non-IS model, they are still available for around $1499 from dealers old stock sometimes.

georgeretired Loc: Manitoba Canada

MT...I was quoting the Canon without the IS. The price you gave is what the IS model is selling for up here in the darn cold Manitoba weather. Wind Chill today is -42.

Photo-Al Loc: Sonoma County, CA

Not sure about Canadian sources ... my SP 70-200 & 200-500 were ordered from Beach Camera in FLorida, the 24-135 was a local Shutterbug store purchase. Besides Beach Camera, I've also heard several people mention B&H and Adorama, and I would assume they all ship into Canada. You probably should make sure that whoever ships to you also includes a thermal blanket!

Bill Emmett Loc: Bow, New Hampshire

In my quest for a good 70-200mm range lens I originally bought the Canon EF 70-200mm f4L (non IS) USM model. I found this lens needed a tripod to get an really decent photos. I started shooting birds in the backyard, and near the shore, and had to jack my ISO up considerably. I was still using the 50D, so I had a lot of noise above 800. I sold the non IS f4, and bought the same lens with IS, from KEH. They made a mistake in the order and sent me the f2.8 model, without IS. I shot a few shots but still needed the IS, and returned the lens, and got the one I originally ordered. Since, I have bought my 7D, and what a difference. Much faster focus, better frames/second. In your local, I would opt for either the Tamron or Sigma 70-200, but with VC, OS, for that fast must shoot now shot, without the tripod, or support. If your planning on shooting indoors and outdoors, get the 2.8 version, outdoors only f4 will be fine. The Canon EF 2.8 with or without IS, is one heavy lens, and will pull your camera down if not supported good with either a tripod, mono pod, or hand held. Neither of the f4 versions will have this effect. BTW, of all the lenses I have bought from KEH, all looked brand new, and were both were rated excellent quality.

WIamateursports Loc: Omro

I purchased a tamron 70-200 f2.8 to shoot my son's basketball games so I could lower my ISO. Worked well. Autofocus seemed a little slow compared to my other lenses but otherwise no problems.

ace-mt Loc: Montana

I have the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8. I absolutely love this lens. I use it for shooting Rodeos, Night Football Games, Highschool Wrestling, Wildlife, and its my default "walking around" lens.
It produces sharp images, even though I use it in rough conditions. I'm sure that the Canon lens is wonderful, but the Sigma will not disappoint you.

Geofw Loc: Thornton Cleveleys UK

I have been looking at the same 2 lenses for a while and finally went with the Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM. I could not afford the heafty price tag for the Canaon F2.8.
I did a lot of research on line and found some very good tests on YouTube by Matt Granger, here is the link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mt_VsEH_T8o.

SWMBO gave me the go ahead to buy it as a Christmas present.
I went to a local camera shop to try the lens and bought it there and then.
I am still getting used to it, but feel it is a great lens.
I have tried it on my Tamron x2 convertor, it looses auto focus but I can live with that for now!

Brooklyn-Camera Loc: Brooklyn, New York City

These were shot with the SIGMA 70-200.. f2.8, I think that they are OK.