Which Lens?
Dimitris
I'm looking for a relatively fast zoom lens for my 10D, trying to decide
between the Canon EF 70-200 f4L and the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 EX.
I've found both lenses at similar prices (Canon slightly more expensive),
and on paper it seems the Sigma is the way to go (as it gives you a couple
of f-stops more) but wanted to hear from people who've used these lenses and
what they think of them.
Cheers!
Dimitris
Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)
It would be worth saving for the IS version (70-200 f/2.8 L IS).
Roger
Randall Ainsworth
<dimitri_74_nospam@nospam_hotmail.com> wrote:
> I'm looking for a relatively fast zoom lens for my 10D, trying to decide
> between the Canon EF 70-200 f4L and the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 EX.
There's a reason why the Sigma costs less.
Bill Crocker
Bill Crocker
"Dimitris" <dimitri_74_nospam@nospam_hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:41385f09$0$29719$afc3...@news.easynet.co.uk...
Drazen Stojcic / BUNTOVNIK
>
> It would be worth saving for the IS version (70-200 f/2.8 L IS).
> Roger
Yeah, but he could get both of those lenses for the price of the IS version.
For me it's just way too expensive. I opted for the 70-200 2.8L version and
couldn't be happier.
--
------------------------------
online photo portfolio
www.stojcic.com
" If you saw a man drowning and you could either save him or photograph
the event, what film would you use?" - Anonymous
Tony Spadaro
--
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
The Improved Links Pages are at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
A sample chapter from my novel "Haight-Ashbury" is at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html
"Dimitris" <dimitri_74_nospam@nospam_hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:41385f09$0$29719$afc3...@news.easynet.co.uk...
Jimmy Smith
all I can say is that is super great and definitely worth the price. When
you encounter a lens of this capability and you have any afinity for good
glass at all............ you actually cry a little when you hold it. I
dare anybody else here who owns this lens to tell me I'm wrong.
Jimmy
"Dimitris" <dimitri_74_nospam@nospam_hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:41385f09$0$29719$afc3...@news.easynet.co.uk...
Jimmy Smith
"Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" <user...@qwest.net> wrote in
message news:413863CD...@qwest.net...
I disagree. The tremendous amount of extra weight and size and cost severly
detracts from the usability of this lens.
Jimmy
> Roger
>
Rick
"Dimitris" <dimitri_74_nospam@nospam_hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:41385f09$0$29719$afc3...@news.easynet.co.uk...
I have not used the Sigma but I own the Canon 70-200 f4L and love it. If
you look around you can find it used for $500 or less.
David Littlewood
lens and she is very pleased with it.
(2) I have never used the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 EX; however, I have bought
3 Sigma lenses in the past and concluded I will never buy another one. I
can't afford them, as I always end up replacing them with a good lens
later.
(3) f/2.8 is only 1 stop faster than f/4.
David
--
David Littlewood
Martin Francis
news:41385f09$0$29719$afc3...@news.easynet.co.uk...
There is one stop difference, and the Canon makes up for it by being easier
to handhold. A colleague of mine swapped a Sigma 70-200 EX for the Canon
70-200 f4L and couldn't be happier.
Of course, if you already have a <35mm->70mm zoom you could try the Canon
200mm f2.8 prime...
--
Martin Francis http://www.sixbysix.co.uk
"Go not to Usenet for counsel, for it will say both no, and yes, and
no, and yes...."
Skip M
news:U2%Zc.54233$N11....@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
(7.6"x3.3" vs. 7.7"x3.4") and an increase of 6 and a half ounces (2.8 lbs.
vs. 3.2 lbs.)as a tremendous amount of extra weight and size. That's
somewhat in the realm of complaining about the pea under the stack of
mattresses...
--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Mark B.
news:41385f09$0$29719$afc3...@news.easynet.co.uk...
I can't speak for the Canon, but I have the Sigma and I can tell you it's a
teriffic lens. Ignore the naysayers. The 70-200 f/2.8 EX is one of their
best lenses.
Mark
J...@no.komm
"Mark B." <mbohnt...@comcast.net> wrote:
>I can't speak for the Canon, but I have the Sigma and I can tell you it's a
>teriffic lens. Ignore the naysayers. The 70-200 f/2.8 EX is one of their
>best lenses.
It is a good lens, optically, according to all the reports and tests,
but the Canon is even better. The Canon 70-200 zooms are their sharpest
zooms, allegedly.
--
<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <J...@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
andr...@littlepinkcloud.invalid
The Canon is slightly sharper and has lower distortion, buth there's
very little in it:
Sigma AF 70-200/2,8 APO EX HSM
Photodo test result: 3,9
Effective focal length: 72 - 193 mm
Weighted MTF for 70 mm: f2,8 0,73, f4 0,76, f8 0,75
Weighted MTF for 135 mm: f2,8 0,76, f4 0,84, f8 0,87
Weighted MTF for 200 mm: f2,8 0,78, f4 0,81, f8 0,81
Average Weighted MTF: 0,81 Grade: 3,9
Weighted MTF 10 lp/mm: 0,89
Weighted MTF 20 lp/mm: 0,77
Weighted MTF 40 lp/mm: 0,54
Max distortion: -2,22% - 3,79%
Canon EF 70-200/4 L
Photodo test result: 4,1
Effective focal length: 71 - 190 mm
Weighted MTF for 70 mm: f4 0.80, f8 0.81
Weighted MTF for 135 mm: f4 0.80, f8 0.86
Weighted MTF for 200 mm: f4 0.81, f8 0.82
Average Weighted MTF: 0.82 Grade: 4.1
Weighted MTF 10 lp/mm: 0.89
Weighted MTF 20 lp/mm: 0.79
Weighted MTF 40 lp/mm: 0.60
Max distortion: -2.11% - 2.91%
Alex
I'm considering a lens such as the Canon or Sigma discussed here myself, how
do they compare on focus speed?
Alex