Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Sigma Or Canon 70-200mm?  
User currently offlineEMA747 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 1171 posts, RR: 1
Posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 4604 times:

I finally have enough money to get a new lens. I will buy second hand but I am torn between getting a Canon 70-200mm f4 L or a Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 HSM. They both come out about the same second hand. Is the Canon better in quality/sharpness etc? If so is it enough to buy one and only get f4 not f2.8?
I am off to see a friend in Zurich in January and want to shoot some planes at ZRH and some mountain railways so good low light performance would seem like a good idea. I will most likely also use it at Le Mans 24hr race and want to see if I can get some good night pics. Google "le mans night" too see what I mean.

I will be using it on a Canon 400D body.

Any help much appreciated.

Andy S


Failing doesn’t make you a failure. Giving up and refusing to try again does!
11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAviopic From Netherlands, joined Mar 2004, 2681 posts, RR: 42
Reply 1, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4559 times:

Both are good performers and both come for about the same price.
I suspect second hand price won't be much different either.
In terms built quality and sharpness you won't find much difference either although like I said in the other thread get your self a Sigma 70-200 without "macro" but as you are looking for a second hand that will probably the case anyway.
In low light the Sigma being 2.8 will have an advantage over the F4 Canon on the other hand the Sigma is probably twice as heavy.
Another thing to consider is whether or not you intend to use a teleconverter at some stage.
The Canon F4 will only take the 1.4 while keeping AF, the Sigma will take a 1.4 and/or a 2.0 while keeping AF.

Good luck with either one of them.
Cheers.



The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 2, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4557 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Not sure if the budget allows but I would go for the canon 70-200 f4 IS, that's a killer lens.

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineEMA747 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 1171 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 4535 times:



Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 2):

I don't think I can spend that much. I have money but I would put my limit at £400 or there abouts. The f4 IS is £650ish second hand I think. I have other things like holidays, Christmas etc to pay for as well.  Wink  santahat 



Failing doesn’t make you a failure. Giving up and refusing to try again does!
User currently offlineEMA747 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 1171 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 4533 times:



Quoting Aviopic (Reply 1):
on the other hand the Sigma is probably twice as heavy.

How heavy is the Sigma compared to the Canon 100-400? I will most likely use the 70-200 as part of my travel photography kit as well as for aviation so weight will pay some role.



Failing doesn’t make you a failure. Giving up and refusing to try again does!
User currently offlineUA935 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 610 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 4532 times:

70-200 F2.8 weighs 1345g.

100-400 weighs 1380g.

The 70-200 2.8 always forms part of my travel kit. In alot of situations the 2.8 is invaluable and makes such a difference over an F4. Take the Terracotta Warriors in Xi'an for example, dimly lit building, 2.8 shone through and allowed me to use a lower ISO.



Live every second like you mean it
User currently offlineBuyantUkhaa From Mongolia, joined May 2004, 2890 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 4530 times:



Quoting EMA747 (Reply 3):
The f4 IS is £650ish second hand I think.

I bought it on Ebay for GBP500, and although it was officially 2nd hand I actually strongly suspect it was new. Not sure if you'll find them 2nd hand often, as I doubt people will want to get rid of them!



I scratch my head, therefore I am.
User currently offlineAviopic From Netherlands, joined Mar 2004, 2681 posts, RR: 42
Reply 7, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 4524 times:



Quoting EMA747 (Reply 4):
How heavy is the Sigma compared to the Canon 100-400?

The Sigma 70-200/2.8 EX DG(macro) HSM2 weighs 1390g.
Not sure what the weight of the previous 2 versions(EX APO HSM and EX DG HSM) was, won't be very much different though.
The Canon 70-200/4.0 L USM weighs 705g so my estimate was pretty accurate.

All in all I guess it comes down to Weight(in kg) or Light(in F), what is most important for you.



The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
User currently offlineEMA747 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 1171 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 4508 times:

I think I would rather be saying "that lens is heavy, but what a shot I got" rather than "that lens was really light but I wish I'd had f2.8 in this light."

Also I really like dramatic shots in snow, rain etc and want to get some of my own.

I guess if the quality of the Sigma is pretty much the same as the Canon I will go with the Sigma.

If anyone has any pics taken with the Sigma can you please send me a link or something?

Andy S



Failing doesn’t make you a failure. Giving up and refusing to try again does!
User currently offlineUA935 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 610 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 4507 times:

Non-aviation stuff:-

http://www.jetwashimages.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=92&pos=9

http://www.jetwashimages.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=92&pos=8

http://www.jetwashimages.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=92&pos=2

Aviation:-



Regards

Simon



Live every second like you mean it
User currently offlineUA935 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 610 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 4498 times:

Aviation:-


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Simon Gregory - Jetwash Images




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Simon Gregory - Jetwash Images




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Simon Gregory - Jetwash Images




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Simon Gregory - Jetwash Images




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Simon Gregory - Jetwash Images



Not sure why it didn't work above.

These are all with the NON Macro version.

Regards

Simon



Live every second like you mean it
User currently offlineAviopic From Netherlands, joined Mar 2004, 2681 posts, RR: 42
Reply 11, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 4463 times:



Quoting EMA747 (Reply 8):
I think I would rather be saying "that lens is heavy, but what a shot I got" rather than "that lens was really light but I wish I'd had f2.8 in this light."

For sure having a F2.8 will be a plus during the 24 hour.

Quoting EMA747 (Reply 8):
If anyone has any pics taken with the Sigma can you please send me a link or something?

At the short end.
F8.0, 1/800s, ISO100, 70mm

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Willem Honders



At mid range.
F7.1, 1/400s, ISO100, 103mm

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Willem Honders



At the long end.
F5.6 , 1/500s, ISO200, 200mm

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Willem Honders



With 1.4 TC at max range.
F9.0, 1/400, ISO100, 280mm

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Willem Honders



With 2.0 TC wide open at max range.
F.5.6, 1/1000s, ISO100, 400mm

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Willem Honders



Also nice for low light indoor close up's
F10.0, 0.6s, ISO100, 103mm

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Willem Honders



Think about 50% of my a/.net photos are with the 70-200 but this should give a pretty accurate overall impression of the possibilities.



The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Canon 70-200mm posted Fri Oct 24 2008 13:39:32 by Calfo
Canon 70-200mm F4L (+1.4X Converter) posted Thu Jul 27 2006 09:12:50 by LGW
Canon 70-200mm F/4.0L From B&H posted Thu Aug 12 2004 03:53:48 by QantasA332
Sigma Or Canon? posted Fri May 9 2003 17:34:28 by Staffan
Lenses - Sigma Or Canon? posted Sat Jan 18 2003 00:39:47 by Davus
70-200mm: Canon Or Sigma? posted Thu Mar 4 2004 05:48:31 by Airbus Lover
Lens Ask :canon 70-200 Or Sigma 70-200 posted Wed May 5 2004 18:28:00 by Gust
Just Accidently Bought A Sigma 70-200mm posted Wed Nov 26 2008 10:49:01 by Flipdewaf
Canon 70-200 F/4 Is Or Non? posted Mon Oct 20 2008 00:28:07 by Nikog
Canon 70-300mm Is Or Non-IS Lense? posted Mon Apr 2 2007 18:06:45 by Nighthawk