Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX APO II

[TP]

Folks,

What is the diff between the older model and the mark 2, ie Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX APO ?

[jediforce4ever]

Thread moved.The lens review section is strictly for lens reviews only.

[Michael]

Chanced this upon another site:

"Sigma version II supposedly corrects any problem with version I of the Macro version which by most accounts had a close focus, softness issue at 200mm."

[victor]

I would say pay a bit more and get the EF 70-200 F2.8L version.

[hwchoy]

pay less and get a magic drainpipe?

[Nick]

I used the Sigma 70-200 previously. I would say it's a good and cheap buy for 2.8 at approximately $1200 brand new but think about it, Canon 70-200 2.8s are going for 1.3k - 1.5k second hand and they are miles better in optical quality and exterior wise. I suffered from serious flaking on the Sigma due to Singapore's humidity. Also, the lens element coatings were just above average and gave images a pinkish tone.

[jediforce4ever]

I don't know about the pinkish tone to the images, but the Sigma 70-200 that I used previously gave me much warmer colours as compared to the canon.The colours from the Canon lens is more saturated and the lens' contrast is noticeably of a higher standard.
Flaking issue was a big problem for me.The exterior coating started peeling off and I got incredibly irritated with it.
For a two year old lens, the HSM gave me problems as well.It started squeaking during focussing.

I would go for the 70-2002.8L no doubt.No other third party lens comes close.