Which 70-200mm for Canon

Nazbit

Nazbit

Nazbit

Soldato
Joined
11 Dec 2004
Posts
3,871
Hi,

Over the winter I plan to be on the lookout for a 70-200mm f2.8 lens.

My main use will be motorsport and it will be used to compliment my Sigma 120-300 f2.8 (EX not sport). It will be used on my 7d and if I wanted to mount both at once I could also use it on my 5d mkii. I also have a Sigma 1.4x convertor.

I don't mind Canon or Sigma, I don't mind buying used. I'm not too fussed about IS/OS if I had it I'd probably find use for it from time to time but it's not essential.

I'm really interested in which lens has the best image quality and which offers the best value for money.

I believe these are the options and what I think are the current prices, let me know of you think otherwise.

Canon
70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM New: £1700 Used: £1200
70-200 f/2.8L IS USM New: N/a Used: £800
70-200 f/2.8L USM New: £975 Used: £750

Sigma
70-200 f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM APO New:£729 Used £550
70-200 f/2.8 II EX DG Macro HSM APO Used: £500
70-200 f/2.8 EX DG Macro HSM APO Used: £500
70-200 f/2.8 EX HSM APO Used: £400

What would you go for and why?

I think the consensus used to be that the non dg non macro Sigma was the best buy, but that's a pretty old lens now and I'm not up to date on what is current.

Thanks
 
Some other thoughts:

I'm aware that some of the old Sigmas have a poor quality external coating but I have that on my 120-300 and I don't mind if I'm getting the IQ.

I'd prefer f2.8 to f4 as I do use it on my 120-300. I know I'd be saving weight and some money with f4 but I wouldn't really be carrying it with me away from race circuits so it's not too much of an issue. Unless the f4 versions give better IQ overall which I doubt is the case.

In terms of budget, I could stretch to any of the above but I'm most interested in which you think offers the best value for money in terms of image quality. £500- £700 would be idea but up to £1000 may be possible if I can be convinced that it's worth it.

Looking forward to your suggestions, Thanks.
 
I own both of these along with a 5d2 and 7d:

70-200 f/2.8 II EX DG Macro HSM APO Used: £500
70-200 f/2.8 EX DG Macro HSM APO Used: £500

I was always told the mk1 was better and it's what I started using for motorsport with the 5d2. It wasn't that great at tracking speed (accl/decel on straights) but for corners and panning I had no issues with that setup. I had the 7d and the second 70-200 as backup in case the first failed on track. Track photos became more regular so I upgraded to a Canon 5d3 with a Canon 100-400 II. I don't really miss f2.8 due to the extra reach, IS and getting a much sharper image.

Depending on where you are you could try the Sigmas that I have. I've not tried the Canon offerings but if it was my primary lens I'd want the Canon if it's anything like the 100-400 II, but for a 2nd lens in terms of value for the occasional use I'd go with a Sigma.
 
70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM New: £1700

This budge best for image quality. Value for money is a personal concept.


My issues with the sigma's is none of them tend to hit critical sharpness wide open across the frame, AF is just not as dear cable and bokoeh is harsher. The older canons have high uniformity, slightly less sharpness, but still maintain nice rendering, bokoeh and reliable AF (if not the absolutely fastest). Older 2nd hand canons will also hold their value, such that you could own 1 for a few years and sell it on for. O loss, maybe even a profit. The sigma lenses keep depreciating.
 
I've owned both the Canon IS models but none of the Sigmas.

The Canon Mk2 is in a different league to all the others but is obviously the most expensive. If you needed IS then I'd say get that but, as you don't especially need it, the Canon non-IS or one of the Sigmas might be a better, cheaper option.

All I'd say is firstly don't get the Canon IS Mk1 and secondly the Mk2 is available for closer to £1k used on places like TP.
 
I have the newest Sigma and the Canon Mk2.

Canon is a fair bit better tracking moving subjects; the Sigma does quite well but can struggle with subjects approaching head on. Canon fares better in poorer light.

Editing time is significantly less with the Canon. Much better contrast, saturation and tones SOOC often with just a minor sharpening needed.
 
Almost all the motorsport photographers that I know have the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS (either Mk I or Mk II). I've owned both the Canon versions and am happy with the Mk II.

Most of the others have gone through an upgrade process having tried various Sigma/Tamron versions only to end up with the Canon 70-200. Most cited things like not quite sharp enough at times, and tracking not as good in poorer light.

Don't discount the value of IS, as it helps you get sharp panning images hand held down to 1/40th or lower.

Fiona Kindness - TrackScotland Impreza by John Stewart, on Flickr
 
I don't own one of these lens but i tried a canon 70-200 mk1 a while ago on a 60d,i was blown away by its sharpness just looking through the lens,i have a sony a6000 and am in the process of getting a f4 version (the 2.8 version is £2.8k) and cant wait,didn't realize these lens are that good.
 
If you mean the Mk1 f/2.8 IS then the Mk2 will blow your socks off. I got shot of the Mk1 as it was way too soft. Both f/4 models are great but the f/2.8 Mk2 is about £1.7k, not £2.5k.
 
Thanks for all of the replies here they have given me a lot to think about.

I really enjoy my Sigma 120-300 f2.8 and so I was hoping that a 70-200 would have as good IQ and be cheaper than the Canon.

If the Canon IS mk2 is as good as everybody says then it would probably be false economy going for the Sigma as I'd probably end up upgrading later anyway.

Assume it would work with my Sigma 1.4 tele convertor but would it be harming the IQ? How does it fair with the Canon convertor?
 
I had the Sigma mkII macro and all 3 Canon's. The Canon mkII IS is the best of the bunch, and it's what I have now (probably my favourite lens on Canon for my use). The mkI IS was probably the most disappointing, the Sigma was sharper for sure. The Sigma wasn't on a par with AF, but certainly wasn't a disaster, it was more then useable. If you're anywhere near Gloucestershire you're more than welcome to try out my lens. If there's a motorsports event, I may be tempted along :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom