Comments about Sigma Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG Macro HSM II Auto Focus Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS:

Under sports shooting conditions, an image stabilizer seems unnecessary and very expensive. Thus the selections immediately narrow to Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Macro, Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG HSM II Macro, Tamron AF 70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD IF Macro, and Tokina AT-X 828 AF Pro 80-200mm f/2.8 SD. Tokina is no longer in production and no useful review can be found thus given up. Canon's price tag is high and image quality is not necessarily better than Tamron and Sigma ([@]). The options are clear. I ordered both the Sigma and Tamron and tested both of them on a Canon EOS 7D back to back. In a short summary, the I compared the performance of Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG HSM II Macro and Tamron AF 70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD IF Macro, two lenses popular among budget photography enthusiasts, using a Canon EOS 7D camera back to back in rigorous lab tests and in real life shots under identical conditions. The Tamron lens shows superb image quality when focused and the copy of the Sigma lens is a total disappointment showing problems in its optical design and quality control. To conclude: - The Tamron copy shows superb image quality, incredibly sharp and low chromatic aberration, but has a tendency to misfocus for low contrast object under low lighting condition - The Sigma copy shows nothing good: significant front focus beyond the camera can compensate, intolerably high chromatic aberration and very soft focus, and totally unusable. I documented the finding in a detailed report with a lot of test pictures. You can download the report from here (in PDF format):[@] [...]

Comments about Sigma Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG Macro HSM II Auto Focus Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS:

We use this lens for shooting my son's sporting events such as soccer and hockey. Hockey is difficult to shoot because of the lighting conditions and white background. This lens has worked very well so far. But it is a big lens and heavy, so you may want a monopod.

Comments about Sigma Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG Macro HSM II Auto Focus Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS:

Great lens, heavier than expected though.

Comments about Sigma Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG Macro HSM II Auto Focus Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS:

I use this lens mostly for Mountain Biking Photography! I recomend using a monopod this is a big heavy lens!

Comments about Sigma Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG Macro HSM II Auto Focus Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS:

Just getting into photography with kids in sports. I have a Canon 70-300 usm which worked great for outdoor, daylight sports; but I needed a lens for night and indoor also. After reading many reviews and considering the price difference between the Sigma and Canon f2.8 I opted for the Sigma and so far am impressed with this lens!

Comments about Sigma Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG Macro HSM II Auto Focus Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS:

This is a pretty good lens. It is light and built tough but doesn't have Optical Stabilizer and is a little slow to focus compared to the 70-200 canon 2.8. If you are on a budget like the rest of us this lens does what it should, if you have 2 grand buy the canon.

Comments about Sigma Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG Macro HSM II Auto Focus Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS:

This lens has a learning curve for the first time user… At first I expected it to do more than it was designed for. It will take very sharp photos if used correctly. Its DOF is very small at 2.8 making it hard to be 100% spot on focus. At 3.5 it starts to really sharpen up and be more forgiving. At 4+ it is good for action. Use only the very best protective filter on the front if you plan to take photos with it at night.
I have used it to take action photos (B-Ball) with it in a gym, caught Haws in flight and nighttime city lights and it has done very well.
If you understand its strengths and weaknesses it performs extremely well.

Comments about Sigma Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG Macro HSM II Auto Focus Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS:

I usually shoot with SIGMA, in fact all of my lenses are SIGMA. Although I do admit Canon makes top of the line lenses, I am not happy with their price, SIGMA has been great. Great focus, sharp, gives me great shots. Its' a little slower to focus then my friends Canon but not much. Once you get used to the timing you don't miss. I recommend it if you are looking for something great without the big price tag.

Comments about Sigma Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG Macro HSM II Auto Focus Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS:

I've been shooting sports action photography for just about 6 years now, and about three of those years with this lens. I'd have to say I was a little standoffish about buying this lens over the Canon 2.8L lens, but with money tight I decided to give it a shot. I'd shoot a few games with it and if it were truly appalling then I'd return it in favor of the Canon. Well it turns out that Sigma has done a respectable job with this lens. Sure it's not as fast to focus as the Canon but it's by no means sluggish and it's not as sharp as the Canon but for most it's perfectly acceptable, it doesn't even produce the same contrast or color saturation as the Canon and most folks would never notice. So for less than half the price of the L series lens you get more than half the lens quality in return.
If your on a budget and you need a fast telephoto lens. Then you can't beat this Sigma it performs beyond it's price point, and that without a doubt makes this lens a good buy.

Comments about Sigma Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG Macro HSM II Auto Focus Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS:

I was very excited about this lens. I liked the way it felt in my hand, great case comes with. Picture quality was good. However, I bought it to shoot low light sports like basketball. I had a 100-300m F/4 so my initial reaction was positive. However, as I started to look at the pictures, I started to notice some weaknesses. While it did a very nice job in getting the shot, the pictures were a bit soft. Additionally, the focus seemed a bit slow compared to the Canon 85mm F/1.8 and Sigma 50mm F/1.4 I was shooting. That said, I am running an XTI so that is part of the dynamic. A 40D is on next year's Christmas list.

I really didn't want to pay the $$ for the Canon so I really tried to make the Sigma work. As read several of the sigma reviews, I felt compelled to take the canon for a test drive. I tested the canon and there is a noticeable difference in the sharpness. The focus is better but you may not feel it.

I wish I could have used this lens and I think there are places it will be more than adequate. But high action/low light sports photography is not one of them IMHO

Comments about Sigma Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG Macro HSM II Auto Focus Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS:

Don’t waste your time!I based my purchase on a few images that were posted online by other reviewers using this lens. The fact that it came with HSM, and cost considerably less than a Canon L lens made it more appealing. When mine arrived, I was pleasantly surprised with the packaging. The Sigma 70-200 HSM arrived with a padded case, carrying strap, hood, and tripod mount. Something that Canon needs to start looking into for the amount of money the L’s cost. Construction of the lens looks and feels solid. The downside is that it also heavy. Take that into consideration if you’ll be carrying this around for awhile. At first the barrel was a bit tight to turn, but loosened up with more use. Focusing an object such as a flower or flag moving with a soft breeze was mediocre. A semi active toddler was no better.Final output of images at all tested focal lengths viewed through Adobe Lightroom and Digital Photo Pro software that comes with my Canon camera viewed at the fit to window looks great, but viewed at 100% was completely unacceptable. To make sure it wasn’t just me, I had a friend test it on her camera and she received the same results. Several lenses were tested of the same image at similar settings. Although they weren’t f/2.8’s, a friends Canon 70-200 f/4, my canon kit lenses at f/3.5 , the canon 85mm f/1.8, and my almost failing 7 year Tamron 28-300 f/3.5 fared much better at all levels than this paper weight. Comparing the colors with the other lenses through the histograms, there is minimal differences. I do agree with other reviewers that it has a nice bokeh. Overall, if the image isn’t great, why even bother?I may have gotten a bottom of the barrel lens, but I don’t want to waste my time returning this for the same lens. Although the Tamron brand currently doesn’t have a USM or HSM , I’ll be looking into getting another one of their brands since they have a 6 year warranty, and will also consider donating some organs to afford the L. In the end, I’ll have better image quality than the Sigma will have given me. [...]

Comments about Sigma Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG Macro HSM II Auto Focus Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS:

I pondered between this Sigma lens and the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L lens fearing the price difference (USD400) equals less quality. I finally decided to make my move by comparing the features between the two. What won me over was Sigma's ability to do macro, the tripod ring coming standard with this lens (a USD 150 value - Canon doesn't have it) and then the price. This is as sharp a lens as it gets! I used it for a month now and I'm a happy camper. It sure is heavy and bigger that expected but packs a strong punch! I love the black rubberized exterior making it both inconspicuos to wildlife and grippy in handling. The pictures below made with product and Rebel XTi without a tripod.

Comments about Sigma Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG Macro HSM II Auto Focus Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS:

I just got this lens and I love it. I have used it for rugby and the focusing is quick, quiet and spot on. If I had the money to spare I would have gotten the Canon 2.8L but I do not regret getting the Sigma. Definitely a great lens for the money.

Comments about Sigma Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG Macro HSM II Auto Focus Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS:

Wonderful piece of glass. Comparable with canon's 2.8 at a third of the price, and it includes the hood and tripod mount and case.

I use it all the time - close-up portraiture, football at night, a good basketball lens for poorly lit indoors, wildlife that is semi-approachable.

At 2.8 it is practically razor thin depth of field.

Quick, accurate focus.

didn't have great results with a 1.4x converter.