Lens Performance Review for EOS xx-400mm tele-zooms gives it an optical verdict of "average (2.70)". The highest rated lens in that group is the Canon 100-400, with an optical verdict of "very good (4.46)".
I am considering the Sigma70-200 2.8 EX. I don`t like the size but I guess there is no choice image quality comes with large lens!!What do you figure Kosta?
I am considering the Sigma70-200 2.8 EX. I don`t like the size but I guess there is no choice image quality comes with large lens!!What do you figure Kosta?
Canon lenses are better with Canon cameras,that what I'm experiencing!
Also F2.8 200 mm Canon is 600 $ and much lighter than the one you want to buy!
2X Sigma Teleconverter will make it 400 mm F5.6 for total cost of 800 $ !
The Sigma is 3.4 Lbs,and if you go hiking with that better hire a Donkey to help you carry all the stuff! LOL
The Sigma AF 70-200mm f/2.8 APO EX HSM is actually a very nice lens (score=4.34) and a good alternative to the Canon 70-200/2.8L (score=4.76), unless you want the benefits of IS. Then you definitely want the Canon...
If you don't need the large 2.8 aperture, then the Canon 70-200/4L (score=4.69) is an outstanding bargain, and is smaller and lighter than its 2.8 cousin.
I had a tossup between this lens (Sigma 70-200 2.8 EX) and the Canon 70-200 F4L. I ended up with the Canon and am very satisfied with it. I have, however, heard nothing but good reviews on the Sigma, and indeed their entire EX series seems like a good deal and an excellent alternative. I'm not likely to stray from the Canon lens lineup, but if I did it'd likely be for a Sigma EX zoom - that 12-24 looks good too. I don't think you can go wrong with the Sigma 70-200, though. I've seen stunning images from it.
As for that Tamron 200-400, I'd perhaps spend a bit more elsewhere. YOu'd likely not see much difference with using the 100-300 and cropping. I'd like that 100-400 L-series lens, but that's getting into big bucks. I think I'm eventually gonna go 300 F4L and get a 1.4x myself.
Originally posted by Dim7:
I am considering the Sigma70-200 2.8 EX. I don`t like the size but I guess there is no choice image quality comes with large lens!!What do you figure Kosta?
I'm also seriously considering the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8, the Canon's is out of my budget. After a tough time at an event such as this, I feel that f/2.8 really makes a difference.
Whoa!!! Very nice - I've heard very good things about this lens (too bad Canon discontinued the f/1.8 version). You loose the flexibility of zoom, but this is one sharp lens and works nicely with teleconverters.
Is that purple fringing on the right side of the shot with the 2XTC chromatic abberation?
Also, are these 100% crops (useful for evaluating lens quality) or are they full-frame 6MP simply resized to 640px? (not very good for evaluating performance).
