Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 MK 2 Macro Vs Canon 70-200mm f2.8 L

[Otter Spotter]

Hi Everyone,

What a dilema. I have been out at the weekend taking lots of shots getting use to my camera and have finally decided between two lenses and I would really appreciate your help, (again!!)

I want to take pictures of animals, mainly working dogs,horses etc and sell the images in order to generate a small income to pay for longer ranging lenses for taking Wildlife pictures my ultimate goal.

I have a Canon 20D and I need a fast lens and so having read and read and read various reviews I have narrowed it down to two lenses,the Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 Macro Mark 2 or the Canon equivalent L series (Non IS version)

The Sigma I can afford now, the Canon will require a little longer to save for.

Can I ask anybody who has experience of the using the Sigma their honest opinion as to how it stands up against one of the most popular lenses in the World.

I am spending far more than I originally intended but I am conscious that if I am going to try and sell the pictures I need a Pro standard lens and I dont want to make the wrong decision now.

If I am honest the Canon would be my first choice but the cheapest price I have seen is £850.00 and I can buy a Sigma brand new for £499.00 with the added advantage of having a macro facility.

Any feedback or comments would be greatly appreciated on the Macro capability of the lens.

I was previously looking at the Sigma 150-500mm but realised that for the time being this lens would not do what I want and I need more versatility.

So looking at the bigger picture would it make sense to go for the Sigma and get the Sigma APO extenders? HELP!!!

Ok, I could go on all night?

I am definately going to buy one of the above I could just do with a confidence boost before i finally splash the cash.

Look forward to hearing from you.
Take care
Andy

[wizzo]

Hi Andy, welcome to the forum mate! I've been having exactly the same problem as you. I'm making the step up (at Last!) from film to digital. For months now, I've been looking at various camera/lens combinations. For me, I've decided on Nikon. However, I've used Canon for years and have nothing but praise for both makers. Like you, I'm reading every review and magazine going. I even went to a photographic show on Sunday, and looked at every combination of camera/lens I could get my hands on. I'm still not decided on full frame or cropped frame format, but it's very obvious, that every expert has their own opinion and there appears to be no 'right' decision, just 'best informed' decisions. I've also looked very closely at Nikon's 70-200mm f2.8 and it really is a stunning lump of glass. My sensible side says that Sigma make very nice lenses too, at a much cheaper price. I know a pro' that uses Sigma and is taking pictures good enough to publish in sports papers. However, he also said that Sigma's quality control isn't up to that of better makes. This was actually confirmed by a Sigma saleman at the show on Sunday - I kid you not . He did add, that they have fewer problems with their more expensive pro' lenses. Not sure what that says about the company as a whole though! Like you, I want to get a long lens for birds etc, but I'm more or less decided that I am going for quality over price. Top lenses will always sell on easier and according to most people I've spoken to, will take sharper, more saleable shots. I'm hoping to sell some pictures eventually, and if successfull, this will hopefully fund a really top quality long lens. Meanwhile, I intend to use a 1.7 TC and just get good at getting closer. I have nothing but praise for all the help and advice I've recieved on this forum too. They really know there stuff and their images speak for themselves. I hasten to add that some of the better shots in the Gallery, have been taken with Sigma 50-500mm and 150-500mm lenses. I will post a link later, to a site that I use regularly. It's geared mainly towards Nikon, but is a totally brilliant site. It's expells lots of myths about lenses and formats and is all written by a top pro', who really knows his stuff (or appers to at least). There is one definate thing that I have learned over the years though Andy. Owning all of the best equipement in the world won't mean a thing without putting in the time to learn the craft. One of my all time favorite photographers only ever used a 50mm standard lens and made history.

I hope that some of this rambling will be of use fella, but I could waffle on all night about this subject. Do let us know what you decide and best of luck!

[Otter Spotter]

Hi Wizzo,

Thank you so much for your reply. Like yourself i have found this website to be invaluable with the information that everyone so kindly gives.

its also nice to know that I am not alone in reading every article going,I realise that I have to make the jump at some point but each purchase at that level is a big drain on finances so its only right to make sure your hard earned cash gets used wisely.

its interesting your comments regarding the build quality of Sigma lenses, I think like any product there will be good and bad.Being honest though I have never heard a bad worked about the Canon 70-200mm 2.8 ,apart from the high price but is that due to its unbeatable quality?

Its a real toughy!!! I am sure the Sigma will produce excellent pics and I can upgrade later if I need to and at least this way I can buy now and get learning.

I trust the forums on this site and its great to be able to speak to people who are using the equipment and know the lenses pros and cons.

I am off to do some editing in Photoshop Elements, now thats another story!!! LOL!!!
Take care
Andy

[wizzo]

Andy, don't even get me started on Photoshop! lol. I'm assuming that the Canon and Nikon 70-200mm fast zooms are pretty much the same in terms of image and build quality. Likewise, I've yet to hear anything negative about these 'great' lenses apart from price and weight. You'll have noticed that almost every professional photographer uses these and I guess that says a lot. I wish I had your sensible outlook, and could settle for the Sigma. Truth is, I probably will. Lets be honest Andy, unless we're going to sell images to libraries that work with the top fashion magazines or enlarge shots to sizes above 30", we would all be hard pressed to tell the difference. I know some people will say that cheaper lenses show slight distortion or have soft corners etc, but in reality, if we're looking that closely, maybe we should be asking exactly what we are doing taking photos to begin with. Who places subjects in the corners anyway?. As a quick example, I recently enlarged a portrait shot that I took at a party to A4. I used a cheap Samsung compact and I was truly amazed at the sharpness and resolution of the print. Just shows eh? I actually don't think you can go far wrong with either Canon, Nikon or Sigma pro range lenses. There's no doubting the quality of all these lenses.

Oh my God I'm waffling again!!! Sorry!

(I will post that link when I find it!) Wizzo

[wizzo]

Andy, don't even get me started on Photoshop! lol. I'm assuming that the Canon and Nikon 70-200mm fast zooms are pretty much the same in terms of image and build quality. Likewise, I've yet to hear anything negative about these 'great' lenses apart from price and weight. You'll have noticed that almost every professional photographer uses these and I guess that says a lot. I wish I had your sensible outlook, and could settle for the Sigma. Truth is, I probably will. Lets be honest Andy, unless we're going to sell images to libraries that work with the top fashion magazines or enlarge shots to sizes above 30", we would all be hard pressed to tell the difference. I know some people will say that cheaper lenses show slight distortion or have soft corners etc, but in reality, if we're looking that closely, maybe we should be asking exactly what we are doing taking photos to begin with. Who places subjects in the corners anyway? As a quick example, I recently enlarged a portrait shot that I took at a party to A4. I used a cheap Samsung compact and, I was truly amazed at the sharpness and resolution of the print. Just shows eh? I actually don't think you can go far wrong with either Nikon, Canon or Samsung Pro range lenses. There's no doubting the quality of all these lenses.

Oh my God I'm waffling again!!! Sorry!

(I will post that link when I find it!) Wizzo

[wizzo]

Andy try this link mate - www.kenrockwell.com Weeks of compulsive reading mate! Wizzo

[pressld2]

By all means read Ken Rockwell's site but make sure you read plenty of other sites too

Dave P.

[pressld2]

Not sure why the link went bad - it should have been to a discussion of the pros and cons of Ken's site at the photography-on-the-net forum but I'm sure you can find it via Google.

The important thing to remember about Ken's site is what he himself says on his "About KenRockwell.com" page:

"Caveat Lector! (reader beware!)

This is my personal website. I do it all by myself.

I'm just one guy with a computer who likes to take pictures. I have the playful, immature and creative, trouble-making mind of a seven-year-old, so read accordingly.

This site is purely my personal speech and opinion, and a way for me to goof around. Don't take any of this as true; I like to make things up as much as any other kid.

I don't own the gear you see me talk about. Even if I did own it when I wrote about it, this site has been on-the-air for over ten years, and very little, if any of it, is still here today. Most of the items I write about I've borrowed from friends and have returned, or if I did own them, were given away to freinds, donated to charity, or in the old days, sold.

While often inspired by actual products and events, just like any other good news organization, I like to make things up and stretch the truth if they make an article more fun. In the case of new products, rumors and just plain silly stuff, it's all pretend. If you lack a good BS detector or sense of humor, please treat this entire site as the work of fiction that it is. it is the product of my own imagination.

This site is provided only for the entertainment of my personal friends, dogs, family and myself. I've never promoted this site. If you're reading this, you got here on your own.

Read this site at your own risk. I make a lot of mistakes. I have no proof-reader and there are plenty of pages, like this one, which have been around since the 1990s and may no longer apply or be correct. I'm just one guy. No matter how stupid something may be, if I don't catch it, it gets out there anyway and stays wrong for years until someone points it out. I can't track everything; I've written thousand of pages and write a few more every day.

If you find anything out of whack, please let me know, since there are a lot more of you than there are of me."

Well, we can't say he didn't warn us!

Dave P.

[wizzo]

Good advice Dave. The only way to really find out stuff is to experiment and learn by your mistakes. It makes interesting reading though, I think. There's no doubting he knows his subject though, and much of what he says I've found to be true over the years. However, as you say Dave, read as many opinions as you can, then you're on your own when it's time to weigh over with the wonga! The thing about Sigma lenses and their quality control, does keep cropping up though, and for one of their own sales people to agree with the negative comments is astounding. Not sure personally if it would put me off. The jury's still out. I believe that quality kit will always pay for itself in the long run. Just so long as you're not wearing stuff around your neck to impress others. Wizzo

[wizzo]

P.s Dave. I wonder how much our 'Ken' makes from this site?