70-200 Canon or Sigma? I am interested in purchasing a 70-200 2.8 but there is a price difference between the canon and Sigma and with the older canon version of the 70-200 anyone have...

MaggieMay1978 Loc: Calgary Alberta

I am interested in purchasing a 70-200 2.8 but there is a price difference between the canon and Sigma and with the older canon version of the 70-200 anyone have any opinions?

traveler90712 Loc: Lake Worth, Fl.

Check the Tamron 70-200 also.

Morrisdh Loc: Pisgah Alabama

MaggieMay1978 wrote:

I am interested in purchasing a 70-200 2.8 but there is a price difference between the canon and Sigma and with the older canon version of the 70-200 anyone have any opinions?

I just recently got the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
Got a discount at B&H Photo and then a $200.00 rebate
from Canon. Love the lens it is sharp and fast and I can
use it with my 1.4XIII converter on a 7D. You may also
want to check out the Tamron Lens they are good and cost
less also. mdh

amehta Loc: Boston

MaggieMay1978 wrote:

I am interested in purchasing a 70-200 2.8 but there is a price difference between the canon and Sigma and with the older canon version of the 70-200 anyone have any opinions?

I think the difference in price is much greater than the difference in image quality. The question is whether that small difference in IQ matters to you, based on how your pictures will be used? The another factor is build quality, the Canon is more solid than the Sigma or Tamron. The third factor is AF performance, both speed and the need for adjusting the lens.

GPoyner Loc: North Dakota

I had the same dilemma with the Nikon 70-200 f2.8 VR vs. Nikon 70-200 F2.8 VRII vs. Sigma f2.8 and of course the older Nikon 80-200 AFS F2.8. I opted for the older Nikon 70-200 f2.8 VR, the build and from what I read it was a tad sharper and faster than the others, especially on my D7000 (DX). There was no way I could offered the newer VRII version. Thanks GP

RegisG Loc: Mid-Tennessee

traveler90712 wrote:

Check the Tamron 70-200 also.

It is interesting that there is double the price for telephoto vs macro. Both are 70-200 2.8 DI. $1400 vs $700)

Higher priced on has VC. That's only difference I can tell from description...

I'm curious too vs the canon

RegisG

amehta Loc: Boston

RegisG wrote:

It is interesting that there is double the price for telephoto vs macro. Both are 70-200 2.8 DI. $1400 vs $700)

Higher priced on has VC. That's only difference I can tell from description...

I'm curious too vs the canon

RegisG

Any image stabilization adds quite a bit to the cost, Canon and Nikon non-IS 70-200mm / non-VR 80-200mm lenses are also considerably cheaper than the stabilized versions.

The newer/higher priced one also has a better AF motor, the "USD". The new one also has better image quality (DxOMark 31 vs 26).

RegisG Loc: Mid-Tennessee

amehta wrote:

Any image stabilization adds quite a bit to the cost, Canon and Nikon non-IS 70-200mm / non-VR 80-200mm lenses are also considerably cheaper than the stabilized versions.

The newer/higher priced one also has a better AF motor, the "USD". The new one also has better image quality (DxOMark 31 vs 26).

Not having image stabilization doesn't bother me but, af motor and image quality do matter to me.

Thanks for clearing that ups for me because I've been considering the same.

RegisG

amehta Loc: Boston

RegisG wrote:

Not having image stabilization doesn't bother me but, af motor and image quality do matter to me.

Thanks for clearing that ups for me because I've been considering the same.

RegisG

In the past few years, it seems that Sigma and Tamron in particular have put in considerable effort in producing lenses which are competitive with Canon/Nikon lenses. I think the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 VC, in particular is a good example of that improvement.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

MaggieMay1978 wrote:

I am interested in purchasing a 70-200 2.8 but there is a price difference between the canon and Sigma and with the older canon version of the 70-200 anyone have any opinions?

These are purely my opinions as I do not own either of the lenses in question. If you make a living with your camera or if you sell large prints go for the Canon 2.8 IS. The money will come back to you is greater sales. If you are a hobbiest and money is a consideration go with Sigma or Tamron. Again just my opinion.

MaggieMay1978 Loc: Calgary Alberta

boberic wrote:

These are purely my opinions as I do not own either of the lenses in question. If you make a living with your camera or if you sell large prints go for the Canon 2.8 IS. The money will come back to you is greater sales. If you are a hobbiest and money is a consideration go with Sigma or Tamron. Again just my opinion.

Thank you-You've made my mind up ...the canon it is!

MaggieMay1978 Loc: Calgary Alberta

thanks everyone-I appreciate everyone's input!

derid

I have the Canon 70-200mm f 2.8 II plus I have several Sigma lenses (Sigma 150-500 mm f5-6.3 and the Sigma 120-300 mm f2.8). I have also owned the Canon 70-200 f2.8 original but traded it up for the f2.8 II.
The Canon 70-200 mm f2.8 II has become one of my favorite lenses. I found it to be snappier and crisper than the lens previous to it. For me it was well worth the upgrade price.
As for my Sigma lenses, it is nice to have the extra reach on the 150-500 mm, but I don't find the image quality as good and the focusing speed to be as snappy as any of my comparable Canon lens. With f 5-6.3, it has some limitations in the field. It does have a great price tag on it though.
The Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 has a nice fast focus, great image quality and a USB cradle that allows you to customize some functions on the lens.
I think that Sigma and Tamron have some really good lenses in their line up, but as they continue to make quality improvements, the prices are also going up.

Michael66 Loc: Queens, New York

MaggieMay1978 wrote:

I am interested in purchasing a 70-200 2.8 but there is a price difference between the canon and Sigma and with the older canon version of the 70-200 anyone have any opinions?

Rent the ones that you are considering, then decide. Nothing like holding a lens in your hands as opposed to listening to a bunch of idiots like us.

buffmaloney Loc: Indiana

The Tamron also has a 6 year warranty.