Hi everyone,

I'm trying to choose one of these lens, however, I dont know which to choose.

1. Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Autofocus Zoom Telephoto
2. Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG Macro HSM II Auto Focus Telephoto Zoom Lens (Canon Mount)
3. Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM Telephoto Zoom Lens (Canon Mount)

The prices that I can find are RM4.4k, RM2.9k (import) and RM4.3k (import) respectively.

I started to hesitate. But of course, many people will say "if you got the money, go for Canon", but I just wish to know their differences.

Overall, Sigma is cheaper than Canon. And, Sigma has shorter minimum focus distance, the Sigma 70-200 without OS has macro, while the Sigma 70-200 with OS is cheaper then Canon 70-200 yet has OS.

The first thing that make me sensitive is the price of course, but I am also concerning about the feasibility and performance. The Sigma without OS is relatively cheap, or topping up RM1.5k for an OS is worth? Or Canon is still a better choice?

Another question is the comparison between the two Sigmas. What are the differences? What's "EX" and what's the difference between HSM and HSM II?

Hope someone will guide me here Those who have tried these lenses, I hope you can give some opinion

suggest uou take the Canon 70-200 F2.8L IS USM (used) only rm 4.8k used

Canon 70-200 F2.8L IS USM MkII.

Reason being is very simple.... It's one of Canon's definitive and flagship lens.

And if you get the Sigma, you'll be forever haunted by the thought of "I should've gotten the Canon".

Never tried 3rd party lens that you've mentioned in your post but I will still recommend that you get the Canon.

Afterall, you get what you paid for and as what sniper has mentioned, you'll be haunted by the clause

Get the canon no matter what. Ive tried considering sigma in the past but after putting extra thoughts, it was pretty much a let down. Sure the price is better, but the edges image quality of the sigma is soft & colors looks a little bit dull. Overall it does the job.

Thanks for all the replies. Haha...if I really go for Canon 70-200 IS 2, then I will have to wait few more months. >.<"

---

Added on August 1, 2011, 2:39 pmI guess I might be choosing Sigma 70-200 non-OS first since it's cheap, and wait I got the budget then I go for Canon 70-200 IS II? Any opinion???

This post has been edited by jeenhao: Aug 1 2011, 02:39 PM

i suggest u get the canon 70-200.
if you are the kind who does pixel peep all the time, you will be surprised that the optimization of original lens over 3rd party lens, there is a big gap.

crispy and crunchy requirement, canon is preferred, even if u pick the one without IS.

Yeah.. sure regret wan.

Somemore wanna get teh non-OS version.

May the Force be with you.

Haha...it seems like Canon is the only choice... Wohoo~~~

PS, Anyway, I love the lens which is white. It makes people who don't know about photography feels that "Whoa! That person is so pro! See his lens...white colour neh...very few people have!" This is what I listen when I was attending a weeding dinner. LOLS.

if your financial condition is good, then best choice is to support the original factory lens other than third party lens. you will no chance to say -- aiks~ why i bought this one~

well if you just want a 70-200 f2.8 with good IQ but not shooting moving subjects, consider the Tamron version.

Tamron is the cheapest among all brands I think...but I heard that it has slower AF speed and the motor is quite noisy? Is it true?

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Of course the AF is slower compared to HSM or USM but if you are not gonna shoot fast moving subjects or mainly portraits/landscape then the slow AF speed won't be a disadvantage. Motor is noisy but you get what you pay for. I managed to get a used Tamron 70-200 for around 1.8k

Stay away from third-party lens

that's pure brand snobbery.

+1

agree

sigmas if you know the work around is not too shabby

i would go for canon , im using one..

A girl being amazed by the bird show in Jurong Bird park, Singapore. Jurong Bird Park is also the largest bird park in the world by michaelbyz23, on Flickr
EXIF

well, that's why i said...........

Tamron 17-50 f2.8 + Tamron 70-200 f2.8 and you have covered practically every range already. Add the 10-24 and SP90 and you cover even more.

Sigma has their range of good stuff too.

I don't use 3rd party brands now but for those with a budget, they're pretty good. you can still snap amazing pictures with it, in many cases they are able to rival the non-3rd-party brand in delivery.

---

Added on August 3, 2011, 2:41 amSome Tamron lenses come with USD, their equivalent of Canon's USM / Sigma's HSM.

that way, get the canon 70-200mm f4 because it quite cheap. arond 2.7k (if i not mistaken for new) and 2.4k for used. do some research n u will know the current pricing. 70-200mm f4 can be considered super sharp and do the job well. and u can always sell it later on without too much difference in price. i tried sigma but the focus is so slow if u are using it for sports. when u got the money, sell it and get 70-200 f2.8 IS.

Sigma image quality is bad, due to its bad quality control, but in rare 1 out of 20 unit, there is a perfect sharp unit. So far I only meet one unit sharper then original brand lenses. But the rest of sigma I have tested is terrible soft! Especially at 200 end.

Tamron sharpness is a lot better, for stage/event shooting, as long its bright enough, Tamron won't go hunting, and event usually is noisy and loud, who can hear ur AF sound?.

Get Canon with IS. Let it be mark I or mark II. Non IS lens will drive u crazy thinking yu should have gotten IS in the first place.