Sigma 70-200EX f2.8 HSM v. Canon 70-200L f2.8 IS USM Photo Gallery by lightrules at pbase.com

photo sharing and upload

picture albums

photo forums

search pictures

popular photos

photography help

login

lightrules | profile | all galleries >> Lens Tests by LightRules >> Sigma 70-200EX f2.8 HSM v. Canon 70-200L f2.8 IS USM

tree view | thumbnails | slideshow

Sigma 70-200EX f2.8 HSM v. Canon 70-200L f2.8 IS USM

May 2 2005: Tested here are 2 very popular "telephoto zoom" lenses available to Canon photographers. [Note: Canon "IS" disabled for all tests.]

[78,800 hits]

Together1	Together2	Together3	Together4
Together5	Test1	Test2	Test3-RaisinBran
Canon-Bokeh	Sigma-Bokeh	Canon-Color	Sigma-Color

comment |

Abhishek		14-Sep-2010 09:34
Thanks for this very helpful comparison! This has definitely helped me to narrow down to Sigma as I am a bit tight on budget. I need some advice from you. How does the Tamron SP AF 70-200mm F/2,8 Di LD [IF] MACRO compare with Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG APOMacro HSM II ?

40Driggs		24-Mar-2009 15:40
Thanks for the info. Looks like I'll be going with the newest version.

lightrules		17-Mar-2009 17:50
I would pony up for the newer version for $100 more. I have used both and they are basically the same with the newer one supporting the latest Canon AF algorithyms more accurately. Both will do you well, but for my money, I'd go with the newer one which also has closer focusing. Regards!

40Driggs		17-Mar-2009 17:46
Lightrules, I know that it has been a while since this test was done, so I was wondering if you had got a chance to try out the newer Sigma 70-200 variations? There is a first gen. non DG version on KEH that is tempting me right now, but I also have a friend who will sell me his EX DG Macro II for about $100 more. I'm leaning towards the older version now because I have heard more consistent praise for it. Thoughts?

lightrules		18-Jul-2008 00:03
Between the Sigmas 50-150 and 70-200, they are comparable. I would go based on FL needs. Plus, the DC lens is quite a bit smaller, which is nice. Both very good optically.

Guest		17-Jul-2008 21:49
Hi. Despite the focal lenght, which one do you think offers better optical quality? The Sigma 50-150 or the 70-200? Greetings.

Guest		13-Jun-2008 21:54
Thank you for your response. Greetings!

lightrules		12-Jun-2008 15:04
Greetings. The f4 L is a great lens. But if you need f2.8 speed, then of course that ends the discussion. It all depends on whether you need f2.8 or not. But they are both excellent optics.

Guest		12-Jun-2008 11:05
Hi. In a comparison between Sigma 70-200 f2.8 and the Canon 70-200 f4 L, which one do you prefer over? Do you think those 2.8 are worth enough to decide over the 4 L?

lightrules		23-Feb-2007 16:07
six42, the Sigma 7-2 is a great lens, regardless of price. You will enjoy it, I'm sure. You will also greatly like the 85 and 135 when you get those. Enjoy the light.

six42		23-Feb-2007 12:25
Just wanted to say thanks for sharing so much info. I've been debating which 70-200 to buy since Christmas for my XTi/400d. I tested a Canon 7-2 4L (non-IS) which made me realize that I needed 2.8 for my needs (field sports, predominantly). I found a good deal on the Sigma 7-2 EX (non DG, the original one) - $799 Canadian new, with a 10 year warranty. I'd like to have the Canon 2.8IS, but it's just not in my budget. Your site has been bookmarked for a long time - originally found via DPR forums. Thanks again - I'll post again when I buy the Canon 85 1.8 and 135/2 :)

billy		18-Dec-2006 21:13
is my eyes wrong?? because as far all i see canon is better than sigma in all test. especially in test 2 when using TC 2x. you note "notice how litthe CA-color fringing the canon is has while the sigma shows a good mount of it", is that true? look again!! i think canon image is away more better than sigma in CA, resolution, contrast and color. i just wonder how can you make a statement like that??

lightrules		15-Aug-2006 14:35
Of all the 7-2 lenses, the 7-2f4L is the sharpest if you're pixel-peeping. The other 3 lenses (f2.8s) are all very close, maybe the edge to the non-IS. But the point is that it shouldn't be a selling-point --- they are all sharp. My opinion is to get the EX lens if you are not getting the IS lens. Of course the non-IS lens is stellar, but that's my take. As for AF speed, the difference is generally in AI-Servo. The EX is plenty fast but the Canons are a bit faster.

asad		15-Aug-2006 11:59
Hi, great test, just one thing though, do you have any idea how this lens performs against the canon 70-200 non IS, i ask becuase from what ive read on the net the non IS is sharper than the IS? In which case comparing the 70-200EX to the 70-200 f2.8 non IS which one would you recommend? for around 300$ more you get a maybe sharper lens, guaranteed future compatibility, marginally better AF. On the the other hand you could get a 10-20 from the money saved. hmmmph. About the AF you said the canon AF might be slightly faster, was this in one shot mode or sevo? is the difference more pronounced in servo? thanks in advance asad

jaetie		12-May-2006 09:20
azmir, there is no difference between the two lenses you stated. the 70-200 already uses internal focusing (IF), and there is no non-IF version.

azmir		29-Apr-2006 04:52
Thanks for the reply.. so how was Yosemite ? may i see your pics then ? anyway .. i still wondering about those two different lenses which i asked earlier .. the one with DG , the one with IF ... which one do u have ? and do u know any different among them ? Thanks so much~~!

lightrules		28-Apr-2006 16:21
Sorry for the delayed reply folks, I've been in Yosemite the past week and just got in last night. Anyway, to Michael, I don't have any plans to try the new "DG" version. I'm sure it's a superb lens though. Personally, I haven't found a meaningful difference between the non-DG and DG versions. I get asked this a lot: Should I upgrade my non-DG copy to the newer DG version? My answer is if you've got a good copy of the non-DG, save your pennies. However, I will say that I did find a good improvement in contrast and high-flare conditions in one lens: the 24-70EX. My DG version was better than my non-DG version. But overall, I am of the opinion that there isn't a significant difference between the two. To Azmir, the AF on the 70-200EX is excellent, fast, and silent. It is very comparable to the Canon L version; maybe not quite as fast, but it is close. And because it is HSM equipped, it is very silent in operation.

azmir		27-Apr-2006 03:38
70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG APO HSM Autofocus and 70-200mm f/2.8 EX APO IF HSM Autofocus . Can u tell me the different between them , please ? I try to search online but didn't get any result. Thanks Azmir sorry for the last post.. dunno y it came out 3 times

azmir		26-Apr-2006 18:12
hello there , just wanna know . is sigma 70-200 has fast autofocus and focus with no noise like other sigma, there give such a noise during focusing. thanks

Michael		26-Apr-2006 09:36
Do you plan to test the improved 70-200 DG EX lens? Photozone.de shows it is sharper and has less CA than the old one. It has been around for at least 6 months.

lightrules		22-Mar-2006 17:51
Paul, any 2xTC will work and AF with your set up. However, IQ is not going to be very high if shooting wide open, and at best only "good" stopping down. If you get a 2xTC, I recommend the Kenko Pro (or the Tamron SP) version.

Paul		22-Mar-2006 17:44
Hi fstopjojo. I own a Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX and a Canon Rebel XT. I would like to know if a third party 2x teleconverter (Promaster, or another brand) will work with this combination of lens and camera. If so, which third party manufacturer would you recommend for quality and value? I want to use the teleconverter when shooting photos at my daughters soccer matches when she is on the far side of the field where spectators are not allowed to go. Many thanks in advance!

lightrules		24-Feb-2006 16:22
Thanks for the comments, LC. The 70200EX is certainly one of Sigma's finest gems. Whichever you end up with, enjoy it to the fullest.

lightrules		17-Jan-2006 01:53
Daniel, the 70200EX is really an outstanding lens. The HSM unit is swift and fairly silent. It's slightly noisier than the Canon USM unit but still very nice. Your copy shouldn't be "noisy" but it is not uncommon to make some slight noise.

Guest		16-Jan-2006 04:02
Hi fstopjojo, great work on all the tests, they really are invaluable. I have a question about the focusing on the sigma 70-200. I just bought a second hand one for $750NZD which is about $525USD. Optically and externally it seems in excellent condition and takes nice sharp photos. However, it does make some noise when focusing, but having never used an HSM or USM lense before I'm not sure if this level of noise is normal. I expected it to be near silent from what i've read, but in use it seems about the same volume as the canon 18-55 kit. What was the noise like of yours compared to the canon L and compared to the kit lense (or similar). Thanks, Daniel

lightrules		08-Jan-2006 16:47
I had my copy for over 3 years used in harsh (sometimes brutal) conditions. It withstood fine. On the other hand, I have heard reports of people saying the finish wears off and "peels", but I have not seen it personally. All in all I think the lens is very good and worth any cosmetic fading, though again I have not experienced that kind of effect. Best wishes.

Guest		08-Jan-2006 11:14
Dear fstopjojo. Thank for your test. I am a Nikon D50 user, but interested in Sigma 70-200 EX DG. I love this lens, but I afraid the "black EX finish" surface and the rubber layer on the surface was easy to get scathed. Some of my friends using Sigma EX lens, but they complain that the lens is very easy to get scathe on the surface. Do you get the same problem after using this lens for a while? Thanks again. Regards, Louis.

lightrules		19-Dec-2005 21:49
Greetings to the Netherlands. Regarding AF speed, they are close; there really is no significant difference. As for future compatibility, who knows, but Sigma seems to work hard at fixing any compatibility problems, at least as far as I know (e.g., free rechipping). And regarding weight, the IS is not significantly heavier. If the Sigma EX weight doesn't bother you, then the IS won't. It's not much difference in practice.

lightrules		18-Dec-2005 17:47
You ask a good but common question. All 4 lenses are superb. That said, I always recommend 2 of them: either the Canon 70-200IS or Sigma 70-200EX. While the f4 lens is very good optically, I don't like that it is only f4, that it doesn't come with a tripod collar, and that it is the worse choice (of the 4 lenses) if using a TC. The non-IS Canon is optically very good also, but it doesn't give any significant image quality advantage over the others, costs more than the EX, doesn't have IS, and still weighs a lot (at least more than the f4). For these reasons I say if you can afford the IS lens, get it; but if you cannot afford IS (or if you don't think you need IS), then get the Sigma EX. I hope this helps.

lightrules		01-Dec-2005 17:56
Greetings. Regarding the 70-200EX and 70-200f4, optically it's a wash; both are excellent optically. It sounds like the f4 might be the way to go for you if you're wanting to go lighter and travel. I currently use the Canon 70-200IS f2.8, though I still highly recommend the Sigma to those who want f2.8 but don't want/need IS or who don't want to pay the premium for the IS lens. I would say you should probably check out the 70-200f4 as it is much lighter. Best wishes to you.

Guest		01-Dec-2005 15:54
hey there fstopjojo. i have the 70-200 sigma (non dg version) and im contemplating on selling it to get a canon 70-200 f4L. i like doing travel photography but i also shoot sports. the weight of the f4 is ideal for travel while the 2.8 is for sports. also, how long have you used the sigma? does the black finish fade over time? thanks. so should i just keep the sigma or get the canon f4?

Freeman-Jo		07-Oct-2005 09:16
So, you get a Canon f/2.8 70-200mm and be graceful. While you get a Sigma f/2.8 70-200mm and be happy. Surely, I don't very see the difference. If you need IS, then the answer is clear. Otherwise, get what you can afford, it's as clear as black&white(literally&figuratively).

bibi0012		30-Sep-2005 17:25
Both are optically excellent lenses. But for me, I won't buy a lens without IS especially with this focal range.

lightrules		12-Sep-2005 21:13
The 70-200EX (and now a new "DG" version has come out) is a Sigma gem and in ALL ways comparable to the 70-200L f2.8. Even though I now use the 70-200L IS, I love the "zen" black EX finish, the overall build quality, the excellent HSM unit, and lovely optics. Hard to find a better deal than this lens, period. Enjoy.

Guest		12-Sep-2005 16:45
I've got the 70-200 F2.8 EX and love it to death. Someone mentioned (way down at the bottom) that 3rd party lenses used more battery power. I typically get the same battery life with this lens as I do with the 18-55 kit lens. I see no difference whatsoever, even though the sigma is clearly moving around _A LOT_ more glass.

lightrules		11-Sep-2005 05:08
I had the 70-200 f4 for a while (during the time I was using the 70-200EX) but I sold the L right away. It was good optically but I much prefer the weight/build and f2.8 of the Sigma EX. I would take the 70-200EX over any of the 70-200s except for the 70-200L IS (and only because of the IS). That said, all of them are fantastic lenses. As for the price, $680 is VERY good, jump on that deal. Best to you.

Guest		10-Sep-2005 23:18
Just wanted your opinion, my budget won't allow for the canon 2.8L(well more like my wife won't allow) so I was deciding between this Sigma and the Canon 4.0L. I'm assuming the Sigma but I would like your opinion and if you knew of a place to get it cheaper than 680.00

lightrules		02-Aug-2005 17:27
You'll love the Sigma 70-200 f2.8. It is optically one fantastic lens with a price that is very reasonable, to say the least. I'm now enjoying the Canon IS version for the IS, but my Sigma was one sharp lens. Best wishes.

Timaxe		02-Aug-2005 17:05
Well as long as the difference is nothing like the EF 50mm f/1.8 with a pentagonal apeture. Now that was something that hurt my eyes at f/5.6. It was alright wide open (being circular), but stopped down... Either way, I look forward to 18 point stars (Sigma). Can't afford the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, although I have used one before...it is a beautiful lens...

lightrules		01-Aug-2005 06:30
The difference is slight in terms of f5.6 bokeh. Indeed the EX has a nine blade diaphragm while the L as eight, but practically it's a wash. Only pixel peepers will care at all...Doh, I'm one!

Timaxe		01-Aug-2005 04:23
There is one very important difference between Canon and Sigma's 70-200mm f/2.8, and you never even touched on it. You probably never even knew about it until you finished reading this comment. My question: How does the bokeh look at f/5.6 - f/8? These lenses feature a different number of apeture diaphram blades, and will render out of focus areas differently when stopped down. At f/2.8, both apetures are perfectly circular (barring the cat-eye effect in the corners). However, I'm wondering how the bokeh rendered from Canon's 8 bladed diaphram compares to that from Sigma's 9 bladed diaphram...you can't determine this when both are wide-open. I don't own both lenses, so I can't test this myself...so I'd like for you to come up with a couple of examples to share. It'll help people compare these lenses a bit better in the future. Cheers. Just trying to make this comparison more meaningful...

lightrules		22-Jun-2005 04:10
Marcos, yes the 70-200EX is fully compatible with the 10D. I used my copy on a friend's 10D many times. It's a great lens. Best wishes and enjoy the Brasilian light!

Marcos Queiroz		22-Jun-2005 03:52
Hi, I'm fron Rio de Janeiro-Brasil and i have a quetion: Anybody knows if the Sigma 70-200EX 2.8 is compatible with a Canon EOS 10D?What Sigma lens is compatible with this camera? Thanks.

Brown_Dog		21-Jun-2005 22:57
Thanks fstopjojo...I always appreciate your knowledge and balanced insight. I am still really enjoying the Sigma 24-70 EX DG you recommended.

lightrules		21-Jun-2005 21:02
My comments on the 70-200EX are positive because it holds its own against ANY of Canon's 70-200Ls. I picked up the 70-200IS because of the "IS"; it gives me a 70-200 range with f2.8 + IS, as well as the option of using a 1.4x/2.0xTC with IS. It was the best choice for me and my style of shooting. I chose to go this route over having the Sigmas 70-200 and 50-500 (or 80-400). So while I am VERY pleased with my 70-200IS selection (a very sharp copy), I will continue to commend the 70-200EX (and the Bigma) as excellent optically. As for my copy of the 70-200EX, sorry it was sold very quickly. Enjoy the light.

Brown_Dog		21-Jun-2005 20:40
Your comments are so positive about the performance of the Sigma...but I notice that you no longer have it in your bag...did you sell it? Was the IS significant enough that you were willing to pay $1000 extra? If you still have your Sigma...i might be interested in buying it.

nhl		01-Jun-2005 19:00
The CA is there on the Canon too... Your Sigma pictures are brighter than the Canon (probably taken @ different time judging by the shadows on the wall). If you equalize the levels making the Canon pictures brighter you can see equal amount of blue fringes - ditto if you decrease the brightness on the Sigma, the blue glow will be less as well. BTW I can see also red fringes on the Canon 70-200L f2.8 IS USM the images are brightened !!!

lightrules		31-May-2005 04:39
Most opinions I've seen and heard would suggest the Sigma is near-equal with the Canon L versions. While it is true that the Sigma demonstrates more CA wide open (and certainly also with a TC), it's hardly noticeable on print. I use f2.8 all the time with it and I do think it's a stellar lens, for the money or not.

Randy G.		31-May-2005 04:06
I have been trying to decide between the Sigma and the L (non-IS), and your testing is a great help and I thank you for the effort. Having some u-enhanced "A-B" samples to examine is invaluable! I wonder if one could safely assume that the images would be of equal quality in both L versions (IS and non-IS) of this lens? These lenses do produce images that are generally close in quality overall, but the CA from the Sigma in the gate images ("Test1") speak volumes. Examine the Sigma f/2.8 sample at 200-300%- look at the fence in front of the window to the right of the gate, as well as the rails and styles in the window itself. It looks like a neon blue glow. There are other examples as well. IMO, with the Sigma, you are paying for 2.8 but not getting it.

lightrules		15-May-2005 23:17
I'm glad this site has been helpful to you. I bought a 70-200L f4 and ended up selling it. I was used to the Sigma 70-200EX f2.8, and the Canon f4 just wasn't fast enough for me and my shooting style. I fully believe it is one stellar lens optically, but f4 in the 70-200 range isn't for me. I also didn't like that it didn't come with a tripod collar. I will be sticking to the Sigma 70-200EX for a long while as optically it's fantastic in its own right.

Monty		15-May-2005 21:22
been spending a bit of time comparing the canon(non IS) and this sigma. there are definitely pluses and minuses to each lens when compared to each other. if i was planning to use the lens at one end or the other it would make it easier but plan is to use it across the range. as well as in and outdoors. tis why i am looking at the 2.8 version rather than the 4 of the canon 70-200. the extra stop of light can help indoors as well as the extra stop can help in action photography. which for me includes racing. i thank you for your time and info in this comparison. now to go read some more. Monty

lightrules		02-May-2005 05:40
There are areas where the Sigma is better optically (e.g., 70mm range), and there are areas where the Canon is better (e.g., 200mm range). I cannot tell the difference in AF speed and accuracy as both the HSM and USM work flawlessly. I do like the Sigma's tension on the zoom ring better, as well as its MF ring as it is just wider and grippier. The EX's lens hood is also constructed better, as is the tripod collar. The Canon's IS is fantastic, although I'm personally used to no IS/OS and so I have a pretty good grasp of hand-holding steadily under most conditions. Build quality on both is top-notch. If money is no issue, get the Canon; but bang for buck the Sigma is one great lens.

Guest		02-May-2005 03:55
The result mached what I had read about these two lenses in image quality. However, optical is not everything about a lens. 3rd party lenses are more power hungry. HSM should be better among others. Have you compared the battery life when using this two lenes, especially in AI servo mode? Thanks for your effort.

click on thumbnails for full image