 |
|
|
scott_scheetz
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 31, 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 130
|
|
Review Date: Dec 11, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $500.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Great manual focus ring, good build quality, good AF speed, lighter than the Canon, pretty sharp (not quite as good as the Canon)
|
|
Cons:
|
Reverse zoom ring (compared to Canon), not nearly as fast AF (but close), the "Sigma EX finish"
|
|
Overall, this is a fairly nice lens. It is much less expensive than the Canon version, and provides very good image quality. It is fairly sharp wide open, almost as sharp as the Canon version. The out-of-focus areas are very nice, even when stopped down thanks to the 9-bladed aperture.
The Hypersonic-Motor is pretty fast and quiet, yielding fairly quick and accurate AF. The distance scale is large and easy to read.
The tripod collar included with the lens is much better than the Canon version since you don't have to remove the lens in order to remove the tripod collar, which is very very handy, and a clever design.
Build Quality is pretty nice. It feels pretty solid, but uses more plastic components on the outer barrel than the Canon versions, making it weigh less. Although it uses plastic, it is still fairly tough, and the rear section is metal.
Biggest complaint, the Sigma EX finish. It's fairly grippy, which is nice, until it starts to flake off. And trust me, it will flake off. I have 2 Sigma EX lenses from that generation, and on both the finish is starting to flake off.
I used this lens for a couple years on crop sensor cameras as well as the 5D, and it handled well on both.
Here are some examples:
Full-Frame (5D)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/scottscheetz/8042769651
https://www.flickr.com/photos/scottscheetz/8042775852
https://www.flickr.com/photos/scottscheetz/8028633701
Crop-Sensor (400D)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/scottscheetz/7672870848 (Shooting into the sun. It handles flare well. Better than the Canon f/2.8 IS)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/scottscheetz/7018235653
https://www.flickr.com/photos/scottscheetz/7750805476
|
|
 Dec 11, 2014
|
|
TEDWARD
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 20, 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jan 21, 2012
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
I cannot, at this moment give you an answer, because of issues involved. when i do recieve a good copy, then i will recommend the lens
|
|
Cons:
|
I cannot answer this question, at this moment in time.
|
|
|
I bought this sigma EX DG 70-200 f2.8 HSM APO-2 lens for one reason ONLY...(f2.8) at 200mm for Sport, and action.....I am not interested in f4, 0r f5.6......just (f2.8) and the copy i recieved last week, in australia with twelve months warranty..... at (f2.8) is rubbish, i only use two apertures for testing....f5.6...and f2.8. Yes the lens is not to bad at f5.6, and so are most lenses at f5.6. but at f2.8 it's terrible. So i have returned the lens back to CR KENNEDYS, for another copy...even the manager at CR KENNEDYS agrees....he to would not accept this lens at (f2.8)...and if copy number two is the same as number one.....that to is going back, So i will have to wait untill next week before i can check out copy number two. For the last four years, i have been useing a 33 year old manual vivitar 135mm f2.8 version three lens by komine, which is resonably sharp....at f2.8. the aperture i require. I just love taking my seven grandchildren doing sports, but as we all know, you are going to miss a very lot of photo's, that are just out of focus.....useing manual lenses. so after listening to my camera club members, and colleagues. about this Sigma 70-200 f2.8 APO flagship lens mark 2 with improved optical performances, with 3 ELD eleiments, and 2 SLD eliments, and especially the lens giving me an extra 65mm longer. How could i refuse. Besides myself, i have also read dozens of other owners whom have had similar problems, with this same lens. Cheers Edward
|
|
|
Jan 21, 2012
|
|
covrc
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 23, 2011
Location: N/A
Posts: 215
|
|
Review Date: Jan 6, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast, reliable, sharp, well built, compact.
|
|
Cons:
|
No OS.
|
|
|
I have had this lens since new, Jan 2006. It has never failed me in any instance that I have used it within reason.
I shoot primarily concerts and some recent indoor high school sports with it. Lots and lots of outstanding images.
In the instances that the lens did not perform, it was certainly due to the request I was making.....high shutter speed, low ISO and not enough light for a 1.4 much less a 2.8.
The focusing was quick and on target.
The lens mount comfortable and sturdy.
The HSM is SILENT.
|
|
|
Jan 6, 2012
|
|
nycandre
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 23, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 34
|
|
|
Feb 3, 2011
|
|
Matt Kerby
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Jun 9, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 1552
|
|
Review Date: Sep 8, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $685.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Accurate silent AF, build, excellent optics, contrast is excellent, very sharp and of course the price (relative to the Canon's)
|
|
Cons:
|
Zoom ring is opposite zoom... I suppose the AF could be a bit faster
|
|
I bought this lens used from Adorama. Don't usually buy used glass from a brick and mortar but wanted a return policy just in case. The ad just said EX 70-200/2.8 HSM IF....Turns out I got the 1st version (that's why it didn't have all the other acronyms  ) After reading the reviews I was kind of hoping it was a 1st or 3rd version. Glad I got the one I did.
I have owned all except the newest (mkII) Canon 70-200's. My favorite being the 70-200/2.8IS and the best image quality I think came from my 70-200f4IS....I don't use this focal length much so I decided to off the white glass and take a chance on the Sigma and use the difference to fund some other glass.
The Sigma is every bit as sharp as the 70-200/2.8, 2.8IS and f4. Not as sharp as the f4IS but what zoom is? The contrast and colors are excellent...You really couldn't pick a shot made with the Sigma from one taken with a Canon. I read some folks (and pro reviews) had "soft" copies at 200mm @ 2.8. Mine is anything but soft at 200mm. There seems to be no difference at 70mm to 200mm's...It's good through the range.
Stopped down to 3.5 or f4 and you'll notice it getting even sharper with some very nice contrasty punch.
The bokeh is beautiful, the 9 blade aperture really does a great job of blurring everything to a creamy haze when shooting close subjects at longer focal lengths at 2.8.
The HSM is accurate, silent and pretty snappy...Not as fast as the Canon USM, but fast enough to track fast moving subjects. If I had to guess, I'd say it's about 80% as fast as the Canons.
I guess the only beef I have with the purchase isn't really a beef....I'll just have to get used to zooming in the opposite direction
I might have paid about $100 more for this lens buying it through Adorama (rather than on the forum)....But it is well worth the $685 I paid. Kudos to Adorama for selling me (what looked like a new lens)
Sold my Canon 70-200/2.8 for $1000. So I net $315 and get the same IQ.......Sounds good to me.
|
|
|
Sep 8, 2010
|
|
sparadise
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 858
|
|
Review Date: Feb 5, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $763.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp wide open
Fast silent AF
Handles nicely with a 7D
Solid build quality
Close focusing 3.3ft
|
|
Cons:
|
Tripod foot can get in the way of the zoom ring
|
|
|
I purchased the latest version of the Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 and am extremely happy with it. The reason I chose the Sigma over the Canon non IS was for the closer minimum focusing distance and price. The Canon is 4.9 ft while the Sigma is 3.3 ft. That was important to me. The Canon IS is at 4.3 ft and the new IS II will be 3.9 ft . The Sigma is slightly lighter than any of the Canon's and the build quality is more than adequate for amateur use. I have yet to wear out any lens I have ever owned. The tripod foot is not an issue because I will use this lens hand held with the tripod collar off 90% of the time anyway. To zoom from 70 to 200 is a very short distance which is nice also. I have never owned any of the Canon 70-200's but did own a Nikon 70-200mm 2.8 VR I and I prefer this lens to the Nikon I owned. Focus is spot on.
|
|
|
Feb 5, 2010
|
|
cjwhitsett
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 18, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 443
|
|
Review Date: Dec 13, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $580.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, sharp, fast, quiet, well built without being too heavy, did I mention price
|
|
Cons:
|
Long minimum focus distance, though the 1.4x TC helps
|
|
|
I have the non-DG version of this lens.
Okay, I haven't had this lens but for a couple days of messing around, but I think it's great. Focus is fast, silent, and spot on; IQ is a new kind of awesome for a zoom.
Keep in mind that this is my first "really good glass," so I'm probably prone to be a bit more enamored than a more seasoned photographer.
Throw on the Sigma 1.4x (also non-DG) TC and this lens hardly misses a beat. The two make an excellent couple. Sharpness and focusing are still awesome.
My only nit--and it's a small one-- is that the minimum focus distance is six feet. It just takes a little getting used to. With the TC however, semi-close shots are still very possible.
I did notice a little bit of CA on this lens shooting a contrasty scene, but, really, it just wasn't much at all, but that's just me.
Given how much the Canon and Nikon alternatives cost, I have to believe this lens is quite possibly one of the best values around. This lens is made to perform without slaughtering your wallet.
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2009
|
|
nick53097
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Apr 19, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 3159
|
|
Review Date: Oct 8, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $700.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast focus, sharp, excellent colors
|
|
Cons:
|
Did not found yet
|
|
|
I have HSM II version of this lens and compare to my friends Nikon 70-200 I did not found any difference in sharpness or color reproduction (I think I like Sigma more for better colors)
Very well build, fast and quit
Highly recommened.
|
|
|
Oct 8, 2009
|
|
LotsToLearn
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 12, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 434
|
|
Review Date: Jul 8, 2009
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 3
|
|
Pros:
|
Internal zoom, internal focus, large constant maximum aperture
|
|
Cons:
|
Seemingly very subject to flare, black finishing easily peels
|
|
|
I have a Nikon mount non DG version of the lens.
I have to give the lens a very low rating because of what seems to be very poor performance under any sort of potential flare conditions. I find the lens produces very soft images, either having a tremendous haze effect or with alot of aberrations, whenever there is any subject in bright light. I get some pretty good results under subdued and flash lighting though, so it's not an overall lens issue.
I have other Sigma non DG variations of lenses and have not encountered this problem so I don't know whether to chalk it up to better reflective coatings on DG lenses or just a really poor copy of a lens.
Regardless, I have to review on my experiences and unfortunately those experiences are not good with the Sigma 70-200 non-DG lens. When I have the funds I will look into upgrading to one of the newer versions of the lens.
|
|
|
Jul 8, 2009
|
|
CSBAlexPowers
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 13, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 8
|
|
Review Date: May 5, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $800.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, fast, inexpensive.
|
|
Cons:
|
Cheap build.
|
|
|
I purchased this lens as an inexpensive alternative to the Canon "L" variants. My copy was used on a Rebel XT and 30D.
Image quality is great for the price — photos are as sharp as the Nikkor 70-200 VR and Canon 70-200/2.8 IS. I've used all three.
Color could be better, but casts and murkiness easily can be handled in post-processing.
HSM works great — the autofocus motor outlasted the manual focus functionality on my copy. It's not quite as fast as Canon USM or Nikon SWM, but focus is notably faster and quieter than non-USM lenses.
While I've heard that front- or back-focusing is an issue on Sigma lenses, I never had a focus issue with the 70-200.
Build quality is iffy, but consumers won't complain at savings of $200-$400 over similar Canon or Nikon lenses. You get what you pay for.
My copy literally fell apart after three years of professional use, but I have nothing bad to say. This lens is perfect for consumers who want a fast, medium-length lens sans the weatherproofing or robust build quality of a top-end Canon/Nikon.
|
|
|
May 5, 2009
|
|
Dirk Hiemstra
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 22, 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Nov 18, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp from the beginning at 2.8, even better at 4.0, nice colouring, fast HSM. Accepts Sigma TC 1.4.
|
|
Cons:
|
Closest focussing at appr 1.5 mtr
|
|
|
Quite a surprice for the price. No complaints apart from the weight.
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2008
|
|
msdawe
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 22, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Nov 17, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $850.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, Speed, Build Quality
|
|
Cons:
|
Lack of OS (Sigma's VR), Zoom Ring and Focus Ring are backwards (picky, I know)
|
|
|
I'm really impressed with this lens. I was comparing it with the Tamron and the build quality and size were the determining factors. It works very well with Sigma's 2x TC.
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2008
|
|
graemeak
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 30, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 313
|
|
Review Date: Oct 25, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $320.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast and accurate focussing, well damped/smooth focussing ring, free lens hood, free case, free tripod collar - good old Sigma! Black - it stands out less than a white lens. Price, very versatile lens.
|
|
Cons:
|
Only one negative aspect... the zoom ring isn't as smooth as the focussing ring, and I feel the lens hood could be made better (stronger material) but it was free so who cares?
|
|
|
I paid £320, not $320.
Before buying this older version of the lens I tried out the newer macro version and I just didn't like it... I found it to have inaccurate focussing and I didn't care much for the design/build.
So I tried this one out and I'm glad I did =) definately worth what I paid!
|
|
|
Oct 25, 2008
|
|
warne
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 1, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Sep 28, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Good build quality sharp @ F2.8 on this copy
|
|
Cons:
|
none so far
|
|
|
Purchased used on E bay uk lens was in good condition with minor marks to finish. Moved from a Canon 70-200 F4L wanted the extra stop but could not afford a new Sigma or Canon. This is a non DG version but not had any reported flare issues If you cant afford the Canon F2.8 this for me is the way to go but check your copy when you buy
|
|
|
Sep 28, 2008
|
|
Shop Hopkins
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 22, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 58
|
|
Review Date: Mar 9, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $799.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Great, all around.
|
|
Cons:
|
Electronic connection (body-lens) problem.
|
|
|
I have the first HSM version, about 2yrs old. Been having trouble with slightly loose connection between body and lens. Results in black frmaes when lens roatates - maybe 1/16 of an inch - and electronic connection is 'lost'! Started with my D70S and now on my D300. Thought it may have been my CF cards, but it is not. Contacting Sigma today.
|
|
|
Mar 9, 2008
|
|
esti
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 27, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Feb 27, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, fast, vibrant colours and built like a tank!
|
|
Cons:
|
None - this is fantastic lens
|
|
|
Without doubt my favourite lens: it delivers consistent, top-quality results every time.
I do quite a lot of concert photography, and found that I need a long 2.8f zoom lens. I looked at the Canon L-series 70-200/2.8 but couldn't really justify the price. Then I tried this gorgeous Sigma lens and I was immediately sold!
It's fast, produces beautifully sharp images even at it's widest, and is built like a tank. The equal of the finest Canon glass, and a fraction of the price.
I highly recommend this lens.
|
|
|
Feb 27, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
152
|
598721
|
Dec 11, 2014
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
93% of reviewers
|
$704.67
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.07
|
9.32
|
9.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
