Gust From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 147 posts, RR: 1 Posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4657 times:
Hi,
which to buy for a 10D ,the canon 70-200/f2.8 L USM without IS
with IS is out of my price range.
or Sigma 70-200/2,8 AF EX IF HSM APO.
Thanks for help.
Maiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 51 Reply 3, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4460 times:
Might as well save yourself some more money and buy the 70-200mm F/4 L. Its equally as good as the 2.8
Gust From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 147 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4462 times:
IL76,
for the moment I have only €€€ for the canon/sigma 70-200,later this year I buy the canon 100-400.
The 35-350 is a good lens and very skilful (I saw good airplane photo's of this lens) ,but I think the 70-200 and the 100-400 are sharper.
Thanks for help Tim,and the tip Maiznblu_757
IL76 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2235 posts, RR: 51 Reply 5, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4447 times:
Yup... The Canon 70-200 is about as good as you can get regarding zoom lenses...
Actually... Isn't the 100-400 (a lot) cheaper than the 70-200/f2.8? How much is the 70-200/2.8 at the moment, round and about?
Gust From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 147 posts, RR: 1 Reply 6, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4423 times:
IL76,
Canon 70-200/f2.8 +- 1100-1200€
Canon 70-200/f2.8 with IS +-1700-1900€
Canon 100-400 +- 1500-1650€
Sigma 70-200/f2.8 +- 800-900€
dependent from wich store you buy it.
IL76 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2235 posts, RR: 51 Reply 8, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4420 times:
Ahh... So it's the IS which adds most to the price.
€600,- difference for the 70-200... That's quite something...
But if I'd have to choose between the Sigma or the Canon, I'd go for the Canon for €200,- extra... I'm sure the Sigma is a very capable lens, but if your spending that amount of money, I'd spent that little bit more on the Canon. After buying my first L-lens last year, I feel like they are definitely worth the extra €'s...
Eduard
Ubidenmark From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4400 times:
I have the Sigma 70-200 f2.8. It's a very capable lens and regularly used by pros, as can often be seen at press conferences.
Optically it's pin sharp with very attractive bokeh. From comparisons I have seen, its colour appears slightly less saturated than the Canon's and its autofocus can be frustratingly slow at time.
Ubidenmark From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4364 times:
You are quite right, there is no doubt that the Canon 70-200 f2.8 is a superb lens.
All things are relative, of course, and I am merely pointing out that the Sigma is a useful lens at the price. Particularly if its limitations do not impact on the type of use which the owner has in mind for it.
Aviopic From Netherlands, joined Mar 2004, 2681 posts, RR: 46 Reply 12, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4361 times:
yeah yeah guess I am the only one using both lenses quite often and I can tell you there is absolutely no difference in focus speed as long as we are talking about the new Sigma 70-200/2.8 EX(hsm) that is.
The EX is very fast and sharp just forget about the old Sigma's as indeed they were very slow.
It would be nice if people could speak from experience instead of guessing so someone would get the info asked for.
Gust just drop me a line when you come to AMS and I will let you use mine for a day so you can make an objective choice.
Willem
The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
Jeffm From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 53 Reply 13, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4362 times:
I have a Sigma 70-200/2.8 EX HSM for the D100, and it does not even come close to the 100-100 L IS for my 10d. And that lens is not even a f2.8. I would go with the 2.8 L IS or the non-IS 2.8 over the Sigma.
Fireguy274 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 299 posts, RR: 8 Reply 15, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4350 times:
I have the Canon 70-200mm 2.8 IS USM and its incredible. I hear the non IS is even a little sharper...I had the 100-400 USM IS and just sold it...I found myself reaching for the 70-200 time and time again for its sharpness....Artie
Dehowie From Australia, joined Feb 2004, 1045 posts, RR: 37 Reply 16, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4334 times:
I also have the 70-200 2.8 IS and it is a good lens.
I am a little spoilt as i have an above average 100-400L that simply takes exceptionally sharp images and the quality of the two is very high and I am still surprised by there sharpness.
The 70-200 is only slightly better that my 100-400L in the 100-200 range but i am keeping my 400 for its great sharpness at 400mm.
I had read from several reviews prior to getting the 70-200 that the Sigma is also very good for its price.
Some reviews from people who have used both stated they are getting similar quality to the 70-200 2.8 IS.
Its not as good as there 120-300 2.8 which from several pro photag's is their lens of choice over the Canon 300 2.8 .
Having seen some pics from this awesome lens i can see why!!
If you can afford the extra 200 Euro i'd go Canon as well as you will be pretty sure of build etc.
Whethter you want the IS is up to you but it does cost a fair bit more.
Decisions,decisions!!
Dazz
Chris78cpr From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 2814 posts, RR: 52 Reply 17, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4288 times:
Go for the canon!!! If you dont buy the best you will always blame the equipment when you don't make the shot! If you buy the best you can only blame yourself!!! lol
Oh and the canon focuses so much faster!!! Beautiful lens!!!
Chris
5D2/7D/1D2(soon to be a 1Dx) 17-40L/24-105L/70-200F2.8L/100-400L/24F1.4LII/50F1.2L/85F1.2LII
Joge From Finland, joined Feb 2000, 1441 posts, RR: 47 Reply 18, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 4279 times:
Go for the canon!!! If you dont buy the best you will always blame the equipment when you don't make the shot! If you buy the best you can only blame yourself!!! lol
But a good photographer is not that who has the top notch equipment, but that who can use it, and even more, can take good pictures with a crappy equipment as well!
Gust From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 147 posts, RR: 1 Reply 19, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 4249 times:
Hi all,
Many thanks for the reply's.
I can read both are very good lenses and accepted each its opinion.
I go for the Canon lens.
For Aviopic : thanks for the offer For Joge : hope I can see you one of the next weeks at Brussels.this year I had extra work (overtime) and no time for spotting. For Jeffm : I want to bring in october a visit at DEN.What I read on this forum over DEN sees there that not very good for spotting,what is the situation on this moment or what are the expectations in the next few months ?
Sponsor Message: 
From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 147 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, 
From Germany, joined Dec 2002, 738 posts, 
That's quite something...
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Australia, joined Feb 2004, 1045 posts, 
From Finland, joined Feb 2000, 1441 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
