Sigma 70-200 f2.8 OS worth the $$ over HSM II macro?
I am looking for a fast telezoom lens, and have narrowed it down to either the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 HSM II or the new OS version. I can get the HSM II used for about half of what the OS costs, and have been reading alot of reviews about both. It seems they are about the same quality optically, with both being a bit better than the other in a couple of areas. The HSM II seems slightly better in the 70-135mm focal range, and the OS seems slightly better at the long end. Also the closer focusing distance of the HSM II is a plus. Build quality wise, I like that the HSM II is all-metal and has a much wider focus adjustment ring. Ofcourse having OS is a plus, but I'm not sure how much I would actually miss that if I were to buy the HSM II. I plan on using it for sports, wildlife/birds, nature/scenery, kids playing, pets, and an occational portrait. So I'm thinking I can either use a tripod or the shutter speed will be fast enough to cancel the need for OS.
Has anyone used both, and how would you compare them if you had no need for optical stabilization?
|Post (hide subjects)||Posted by||When|
|Jan 29, 2014|
|Jan 30, 2014|
|Feb 5, 2014|
|Jan 30, 2014|
|Feb 4, 2014|
|Feb 9, 2014|
|Feb 11, 2014|
|A house for sneakers by fotoselect|
from Feet, shoes, anything to do with HUMAN feet
|A Sunday Stroll by TexasGal|
from call any vegetable
|Green roots by cand1d|
from Lichen and moss
|Start of study by Shirsendu Bandyopadhyay|
from Seven Story plots - Rebirth