about | support
home
 


  Reviews by: Matt Clarke  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Matt Clarke to your Buddy List
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM

ef70_200_4_1_
Review Date: Dec 18, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Lightweight. Sharp images. Great contrast and colour saturation. It does what I expect of it.
Cons:
None.

I got this lens a few days ago after taking back a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 apo.

This piece of L glass, works superbly compared to the Sigma.

The images are sharp. There is no chromatic aberration, and it weighs a lot less than the Sigma.

The only downside is the price. Over here in the United Kingdom, we pay through the nose for luxury items, and Canon L glass is no exception.

Worth every penny though Smile


 
Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 EX APO IF HSM

05_03_1_
Review Date: Dec 18, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 4 

 
Pros: Less expensive than Canon L glass.
Cons:
More chromatic aberration than my Canon 90-300 USM. Soft focussing even at f8 and mounted on a tripod.

I used this lens for two weeks, once at a rugby match, and then again in the studio.
The chromatic aberration was much worse than my "plastic piston", Canon 90-300 USM.
The soft focussing occured across the entire focal and aperture range.
I took it back on Sunday and exchanged it for a Canon 70-200 F4L.
Sorry Sigma, but this piece of glass just couldn't do the job expected of it, and I wasn't prepared to go through the hassle of having it put right. At this price it should've worked perfectly right out of the box.