For what d'you use your Sigma 70-200 /f2.8 ??

[Dom167916]

Re. Sigma 70-200 f2.8
Im wondering about getting this lens. I'm hoping that I'll use it alot.

For those that already own and use this lens, what do you use it for and how often do you find that its size and weight is a consideration, for whether or not to take it with you?

Finally, would love to see a sample or 2 of your best shots with the lens.

Thanks. Dom

 

[Roy van der Woning]

Im wondering about getting this lens. I'm hoping that I'll use it
alot.

.. why do you consider purchasing this lens when you don't know what you're going to use it for?

Roy.

 

[Dom167916]

well, I kind of don't like to plan shots too much, and ones which I do usually require a wide-angle. The only thing Ive got lined up which I am planning, and know Ill want the use of a telelphoto, is the Chinese New Year celebrations in london on the 13th feb.

here is the sort of random stuff I shoot. I often use telephoto, but rarely planned, and I'd like some good quality and low light ability from the 2,8 for shots when i do use a tele. Dom

http://www.pbase.com/dom277

Im wondering about getting this lens. I'm hoping that I'll use it
alot.

.. why do you consider purchasing this lens when you don't know
what you're going to use it for?

Roy.

 

[PFR]

I have the 70-200 mounted on my 20D. It is my lens of choice when ever I know I need sharp clean shots. The size is not a major issue unless I am going to be doing more walking than shooting.

Here are some samples of indoor stuff.





I have not had a lot of chances to use it outside yet.

Back in my Nikon days I would frequently walk around with the Nikkor 70-200 loaded on the D100. That combination is about the same as the Sigma and the 20D.

Re. Sigma 70-200 f2.8
Im wondering about getting this lens. I'm hoping that I'll use it
alot.

For those that already own and use this lens, what do you use it
for and how often do you find that its size and weight is a
consideration, for whether or not to take it with you?

Finally, would love to see a sample or 2 of your best shots with
the lens.

Thanks. Dom

--
Pat

http://www.iceshots.smugmug.com
Discount coupon code: FSteR0RMf2nEs

 

[Dom167916]

great shots PFR, glad to hear you like the lens. Looks like a great 'event' lens, for low light, clean shots as you say, 'and' isolating the subject.

Have you do you intend to use a 1.4x TC with it occasionally, for the times you want even more reach? Dom

Here are some samples of indoor stuff.





I have not had a lot of chances to use it outside yet.

Back in my Nikon days I would frequently walk around with the
Nikkor 70-200 loaded on the D100. That combination is about the
same as the Sigma and the 20D.

Re. Sigma 70-200 f2.8
Im wondering about getting this lens. I'm hoping that I'll use it
alot.

For those that already own and use this lens, what do you use it
for and how often do you find that its size and weight is a
consideration, for whether or not to take it with you?

Finally, would love to see a sample or 2 of your best shots with
the lens.

Thanks. Dom

--
Pat

http://www.iceshots.smugmug.com
Discount coupon code: FSteR0RMf2nEs

 

[PFR]

I have not tried a teleconverter yet, but all account say you do not lose a lot by using them. My only concern is that the Sigma 70-200 needs a special converter, from what I can tell.

great shots PFR, glad to hear you like the lens. Looks like a great
'event' lens, for low light, clean shots as you say, 'and'
isolating the subject.
Have you do you intend to use a 1.4x TC with it occasionally, for
the times you want even more reach? Dom

--
Pat

http://www.iceshots.smugmug.com
Discount coupon code: FSteR0RMf2nEs

 

[M Irwin]

It's not that it needs a special teleconverter but rather most people are finding it a very good match between the Sigma Apo converter and that particular lens. A big chunk of these were with the converter on.

http://www.pbase.com/myirwin/lime_rock_2004

I have not tried a teleconverter yet, but all account say you do
not lose a lot by using them. My only concern is that the Sigma
70-200 needs a special converter, from what I can tell.

 

[borax]

The sigma 70-200 f/2.8 is surely an excellent lens, but the canon 70-200 f/4L too. Difference: the canon is better build, lighter, smaller, but is a little less fast.

So why choosing the sigma if you don't need this f2.8 aperture ? I think that in most situation, the canon would be a better choice. Sigma is the choice for dark condition.

 

[Dom167916]

the extra stop I'd really like, I live in England, not the brightest country!

The teleconverter would make it f4 yeah, but I would only imagine using that minimally, when really needed. From what I read the Sigma is well build, maybe not 'Canon L' well built, but itll do the job, I dont plan on dropping the lens on concrete if i can help it! I own a Sigma 15mm fisheye and the 18-50ex f2.8 and both of these are build like bricks, not flimsy by any margin. The Sigma 70-200 is same ballpark price as the canon f4, but it's half the price of the Canon 2.8 lens. Finally, I prefer black to white! White is great, but I just prefer less-conspicuous if possible, and the white resistance to heat absorption is a non issue, ..England remember! Dom

The sigma 70-200 f/2.8 is surely an excellent lens, but the canon
70-200 f/4L too. Difference: the canon is better build, lighter,
smaller, but is a little less fast.

So why choosing the sigma if you don't need this f2.8 aperture ? I
think that in most situation, the canon would be a better choice.
Sigma is the choice for dark condition.

 

[Dom167916]

Is the typical Sigma 1.4x EX t/c the APO glass you are talking of, or is there an APO and a non-APO Sigma EX t/c?

http://www.pbase.com/myirwin/lime_rock_2004

I have not tried a teleconverter yet, but all account say you do
not lose a lot by using them. My only concern is that the Sigma
70-200 needs a special converter, from what I can tell.

 

[M Irwin]

The current "typical" one is called the "Apo Tele Converter 1.4x AF". I think there ware a previous generation that is no APO designated.

Is the typical Sigma 1.4x EX t/c the APO glass you are talking of,
or is there an APO and a non-APO Sigma EX t/c?

 

[Dom167916]

Is the typical Sigma 1.4x EX t/c the APO glass you are talking of,
or is there an APO and a non-APO Sigma EX t/c?

 

[Roy van der Woning]

The sigma 70-200 f/2.8 is surely an excellent lens, but the canon
70-200 f/4L too. Difference: the canon is better build, lighter,
smaller, but is a little less fast.

In what way(s) do you consider the Canon to be better built than the Sigma?

Roy.

 

[Roy van der Woning]

here is the sort of random stuff I shoot. I often use telephoto,
but rarely planned, and I'd like some good quality and low light
ability from the 2,8 for shots when i do use a tele. Dom

http://www.pbase.com/dom277

I like your galleries, you seem to be more of an "artist" than most of the gear heads that frequent these fora.

I have the Sigma 70-200/2.8 myself and I'm very pleased with it. Sharp, fast, built like a tank (like all my EX's) and nice to handle. I'm sure you'll be pleased with it. Looking forward to seeing your results.

Roy.

 

[Phil Hurst]

Dom,

The Sigma is an excellent lens... if you are still in London you are more than welcome to visit and give mine a try....

All the best

Phil

--
Phil
**************************
http://www.pbase.com/philh04
**************************
Equipment list in profile

 

[Dom167916]

here is the sort of random stuff I shoot. I often use telephoto,
but rarely planned, and I'd like some good quality and low light
ability from the 2,8 for shots when i do use a tele. Dom

http://www.pbase.com/dom277

I like your galleries, you seem to be more of an "artist" than most
of the gear heads that frequent these fora.

thanks blush

But I'm a bit of a gear head myself, i love the technology and craftsmanship of camera gear.

I have the Sigma 70-200/2.8 myself and I'm very pleased with it.
Sharp, fast, built like a tank (like all my EX's) and nice to
handle. I'm sure you'll be pleased with it. Looking forward to
seeing your results.

Glad to hear it.
I hope I produce some results worthy of the lens!

Cheers. Dom

 

[Dom167916]

Hi Phil, thanks very much for the offer. I think Im pretty set on this lens now. May even purchase this weekend, as funds allow.

Are you still working for the Natural History Museum?
Cheers. Dom

Dom,

The Sigma is an excellent lens... if you are still in London you
are more than welcome to visit and give mine a try....

All the best

Phil

--
Phil
**************************
http://www.pbase.com/philh04
**************************
Equipment list in profile

 

[Phil Hurst]

Hi Dom,

You won't regret it, I have compared mine with a colleagues 70-200 f2.8L (non IS) and it is pretty close, the L is sharper wide open but as you stop down slightly the difference goes away. Unless you are pixel peeping they are as near as dammit identical.

Yep, still there, been here 25yrs this year, another 13 and I can retire ;-)

All the best

Phil

Are you still working for the Natural History Museum?
Cheers. Dom

Dom,

The Sigma is an excellent lens... if you are still in London you
are more than welcome to visit and give mine a try....

All the best

Phil

--
Phil
**************************
http://www.pbase.com/philh04
**************************
Equipment list in profile

--
Phil
**************************
http://www.pbase.com/philh04
**************************
Equipment list in profile

 

[Marco van den Hout]

For those that already own and use this lens, what do you use it
for and how often do you find that its size and weight is a
consideration, for whether or not to take it with you?

I bought it for rock concert shots and it's very useful for that. I also have a 35/2 and 85/1.8 especially for extremely low light. All three are very sharp and focus fast and good (only the 35/2 making noise in the process

I carry it in a Tamrac backpack and then it's no problem for me to walk with it the whole day. I have also handheld it at concerts for several hours (at times cradling it between arms, often holding it up for the shots). I have an EF 70-210/3.5-4.5 but never bother taking it with me even though it's much lighter and quite a bit smaller.

I also use the lens for airliner photography. The f/2.8 is not that important there, I suppose a 70-200/4L would do just fine there too (unless stacked with teleconverters maybe?) but it works great.

Finally, would love to see a sample or 2 of your best shots with
the lens.

This series was made with the Sigma: http://nothingless.org/treble/westerpop/index.php?id=11#pic
and this one:



and an airplane:
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/675937/L/