Canon 70-200 f/4L is vs Sigma 70-300 f/4

[brutus123]

I'm thinking about buying one of the above lenses and would like any comments from current users.

The Sigma appears to have very good credentials and reviews and has the advantage of a bit more reach. However, the Canon is L glass and has the IS functionality.

Maybe the best way would be with the Canon and use a 1.4 TC to make up the difference??

Any comments would be appreciated.

[TonyT]

Hi Brutus
With the 40D Remeber the crop facter 70-200 will be 105-300 also converters up your F stop
I have the 70-200 @ 2.8 on my 5D with the 2* it 140-400 @ 5.6. The IS is the big plus
Is the sigma a ff lense or a lense made for your size senor if ff lense then it 105-450
So if you want lenght the sigma will give it to you with the low f stop but hard to hold
Hope this helps

[brutus123]

Sorry Tony, the Sigma lens I mentioned should have been the Sigma 100-300mm f/4 EX DG not the 70-300mm. It would be unreasonable to ecxpect the Siggy 70-300 to be compared to the Canon 70-200 f/4 IS.

Again any comments would be appreciated.

[chrisk]

obviously i'm a non-canon user and have never used the 100-300 siggie. but i will say this. the 70-200/4 L is one of the nicest lens' i've ever had the pleasure of shooting with on a 30d. everything from the feel, weight, balance, IQ, handling, dampness on the ring and zoom is about as close to perfect as it gets imo. i'd kill for that lens on my d300.

[dviv]

the 70-200/4 L is one of the nicest lens' i've ever had the pleasure of shooting with on a 30d. everything from the feel, weight, balance, IQ, handling, dampness on the ring and zoom is about as close to perfect as it gets imo.

[ozimax]

the 70-200/4 L is one of the nicest lens' i've ever had the pleasure of shooting with on a 30d. everything from the feel, weight, balance, IQ, handling, dampness on the ring and zoom is about as close to perfect as it gets imo.

[ozimax]

I now have the 70-200 F2.8 lens, which is outstanding in every respect except for it's weight. There are times when I wish I had the F4 version again. Maybe bokeh is the one area it excels as opposed to the F4 version, but they're all superb lens.

Ozi

[ozonejunkie]

the 70-200/4 L is one of the nicest lens' i've ever had the pleasure of shooting with on a 30d. everything from the feel, weight, balance, IQ, handling, dampness on the ring and zoom is about as close to perfect as it gets imo.

The 70-200 f4 is (IMO) a really beautiful lense. Whilst I have never been lucky enough to play with 2.8 version, the 4 is really well balanced and just feels nice. My experience is all with the non IS version though.

[zafra52]

As mentioned above, there is no comparsion. I have both lenses and the Canon 70-200 L IS f/4 produces far better pictures in low light handheld than the Sigma 70-300 f/4, which also produce very nice pictures, but softer with plenty of light or using a tripod. Even if the Sigma lense is 100 - 300 f/4 unless it has a bigger diametre and vibration compensation is not going to match the Canon. The Cannon hasn't got as much magnification so its pictures are going to be sharper.

However, compare also prices and decide how large you want your print images to be because for small prints or the Internet you might as well buy the cheaper lens, but if you want to print to an A3 size and be sharp then you should go for, as someone advised me in this forum a year plus ago, the best lense you can afford even if you need to wait and save for it.

[Doctor]

I take it the advice given above would also apply to the canon 400mm f/5.6L USM Super Telephoto Lens and a Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3 EX DG HSM?

Im considering one or the other, at the moment for a 400d, (settled for it cos i couldnt afford the 40d at the time i needed it), but upgrading to a 5d at some point in the future

[zafra52]

Sorry, I only have the Canon 30d (not the full size sensor), plus a few lenses and by far the prime lens (without zoom) far outsmart the other lenses regarding colour and sharpness. I learn by experience that the advice given to me in this forum has proved right. I suppose you already know this, but a lens will give you different result if you bought it for a camear with a smaller sensor and then you upgrade to camera with a full size sensor, providing it fits the camera body. I believe it looses some magnification because it becomes a wider lens. But, don't take my word for it ask about it. Don't compromise, but save and buy the best lens you can afford or you will end up with a collection of lenses you don't use and cannot get rid of withou loosing money.

[stephenvandermark]

i have used both and the scope for both lenses is lightly different. The 70-200/f4 IS is amazing, especially the IS and I mainly use it for travel photography. If you don't mind carrying around a bit more bulk and have a bit more range then go for the 100-300/f4. Resolving power of both lenses is pretty similar. Not sure about CAs and vignetting though, I have to check. The big plus for the canon is the IS and this gives you about 3-4 stops advantage.........

cheers,

Stephen