Sigma 70-200mm sports vs EF version 3 and RF 70-200mm 2.8 feedback?

Steve Balcombe wrote:

Luis Gabriel Photography wrote:

tdbmd wrote:

I had compared the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 vs the Tamron G2 70-200 f2.8 and ended up buying the Tamron as I felt like the AF was a bit faster and more accurate.

That is interesting, intriguing, and concerning...although I ruled out the Tamron as I cannot stand focus breathing, unfortunately.

Focus breathing can be a nightmare for video obviously, but when is it an issue for stills? I used an EF 100-400L II for years, now replaced with an RF 100-500, both of which exhibit major focus breathing, but in practical use I literally never notice it. I know it's there mainly from calculations of the focal length at close focusing distance, not by seeing it in the viewfinder.

Of course, it can be an issue for stills as well. If I buy a 200mm is because I want that "compression" and what it does to facial features on a headshot for example. If I were doing landscape, then that is not an issue but at a close distance when it happens as bad as it was with a previous Tamron I had (around 167mm in real life) then is like I am been cheated of what I paid for. On an event that means moving closer to a subject when I may not be label to do so, cropping, at what not. Again, I bought a 200mm not a 70-167mm. 
In the end, for some this may not be an issue, for others, like me, it is. We all have different needs so just because something does not affect me, I am going to assume the rest of the world feels the same.