Fast Focus Sharp Constant 2.8 Good feel Removable collar mount Price

Can't think of any at the moment

I really can't say anything bad about this lens. Since switching over to digital with a new S2pro, I needed a quality lens to keep up with the digital format. I read good things about this lens but was skeptical due to the name(sorry Sigma). Due to money constraints I decided to buy this until I could get the Nikon. Well, I'm happy to say, there will be no upgrading from this wonderful lens. It has become my favorite studio lens!

Cheap

Must be stopped down unreliable focusing for action Its a Sigma-may not work with future Canons

You get what you pay for. This lens is certainly cheap(as are all Sigmas), In field shooting I find it hunting too often for a 2.8. I am also dissapointed with its performance wide open, it cannot compare to my 10 year old Canon 80-200L. This one may be a step up from the juncky low end Sigmas, but its a long way from Canon L or Nikon ED gear.

Customer Service

Will sell before needed

Similar Products Used:

Canon 80-200 f2.8L Nikon 80-200 f2.8ED Canon 100-300 f5.6L

Great construction. Fast and accurate AF. Very silent AF. Tack sharp to f4 and usable to f2.8 Good focus and zoom ring feel

Heavy - I knew it going in, so should you. No image stabilization available, yet. Don't like the gray finish. Would prefer black.

This is my first "major" lens purchase in many a year. I took a long vacation from shooting. I purchased a D-30 with a 28-105 Canon lens and was in need of a zoom for the 70-200 range. I immediately started getting caught up in the "L" glass histeria and snobbery that seems to envelop people. I couldn't justify the extra money. I am happy I didn't. The Sigma has exceeded my expectations. It is sharp as a tack all the way to F4. And the real surprise was how sharp it was at 2.8. It is a little soft but it can be made up for in a digital environment by a couple of clicks of a mouse. Some try and say to buy a Canon 70-200 f4L instead. Well the f4 isn't as sharp as the SIG at f4 and it DOES NOT include a tripod mount. It is a $140 option. So you will spend $200 more on the canon and lose a couple of stops. Then you deal with the whole 2x converter/non af thing. With the SIG the AF works with the SIG APO 2x. If only Sigma offered and IS option this would be a perfect lens. Considering it is $400+ less expensive than the non Is Canon version I would rather save the $400 and get the Sigma 15-30. Sounds like a Sigma commercial I know, but they are now producing great products...

Customer Service

Never used.

Similar Products Used:

Canon 70-200 2.8L Canon 70-200 2.8L IS Tokina 80-200 2.8

Sharp, fast and cheap

Sometimes the focus could be faster..

This is the best Sigma lens that i have ever used, the pictures are so sharp, i use it when i shoot concerts and it's great. The focus i fast and precise and the zoom ring is good.. And it is very cheap.. There's a hood and bag.

Customer Service

Never...

Similar Products Used:

Nikon 80-200 AIS, that is one big lens when the hood is on..

Price F2.8

slow focus (HSM is not as fast as USM) but not too bad

First, it's cheap. If you have small bucks and want to get a telezoom with F2.8 maximum, this lens is the best choice. However, HSM motor doesn't work as fast as USM in Canon. I used this one and finally sold it to get Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L.

Customer Service

none

Similar Products Used:

Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L USM Canon EF 24-85mm F3.5-4.5 USM Canon EF 75-300mm F4.5-5.6 USM

Accurate, fast, quiet HSM autofocus. Attractive coloring. Clean, sharp images. Terrific price compared to Canon.

Big and heavy. Still trying to figure out how best to carry it around for street photography and the like. But any 2.8 lens in this zoom range will create the same dilemma.

Wonderful lens. Purchased and used with a Canon D30 for a national basketball tournament and shot over 1500 photographs in a few days. It was a splendid performer. HSM is plenty fast, accurate and very quiet. The colors are a toucher cooler than Canon's 70-200 4.0 lens (older model with the push-pull zoom), but very attractive. Photos are plenty sharp. The photo coloring and contrast are a large step above the Canon 28-135 USM IS that I've used. Portraits, particularly outdoors when there's some room to use the long-range zoom, are exquisite. As a serious photo hobbyist, its plenty of lens for me.

Customer Service

Not tried.

Similar Products Used:

Canon 70-200 4.0 Canon 28-135 IS USM

Fast, sharp, contrasty, removable tripod collar reduces weight and makes hand holding easier.

None

I bought this lens in a sale for a bargain price. I had been having sleepless nights trying to decide between this and the Nikon 80-200 which costs about 20% more, but the sale price for the Sigma along with the slightly faster AF and detatchable tripod collar convinced me to go for the Sigma. Since buying it however it has been back to Sigma twice within 2 months, once to be rechipped for my F100, and the second time because the lens came back with a chip in the front element caused I suspect during the warranty repair, so I had the front element replaced. After all this hassle, I am pleased with the lens, it's very sharp, focuses fast, and is not too heavy.

Customer Service

Reluctant to acknowledge damage was their fault, turnaround time for repair slow

Similar Products Used:

None

nice hood ,good handling ,not bad image quality .

easily broken ,plastic outlook ,HSM is slower than the nikon AF(why?) ,Serious flare...

Good lens ,Altough image is not as sharp and vivid as nikon ,it''s pretty good for portrait. I think nikon is little bit too sharp for portrait.. Focus is quiet ,but not as fast as nikon AF.Flare problem is serious.It''s not cheap ,u can buy a nikon with a few more money. However,it''s quite cheap in 2hand,so go for a 2hand if u really want this lens..I buy this lens in 2hand at us$350 in Hong Kong with 99% new..

Customer Service

Very Good in Hong Kong SIGMA ... just too good ...

Similar Products Used:

nikon AF 80-200

Pro grade lens

More expensive than "Grey" Nikkor AF; Problem with F80;

Nice lens, beats results from all those 100$ zooms. Of course, soft and light falloff at 2.8; heavy? not quite that bad for a 2.8 tele. Not quite as fast as the AF-S Nikkor, and picture quality is slighly lesser than the Nikkors too. Not bad at all, but i''''''''d rather get the Nikkor AF at this price.

Similar Products Used:

Nikkor 80-200 AF and AF-S

a "real" lens much less expenive than camera manufacturer equivalent lens hood and case included tripod collar also included very manual focus friendly very sharp from f/4 on

a bit soft at f/2.8 filters expensive being my most expensive lens, I always worry about it getting stolen but I"ll get over it

I bought this lens to replace my Quantaray 70-300 "cheap junk"lens. I have to say, this is a "real"lens. Yes, the Nikon is better I''m sure, but my budget is not unlimited, and this one is a few hundred less. The extra speed offers more flexibility, and the image through the viewfinder is bright. It is big and heavy, but you can get used to handholding it as long as it''s'' not too windy. A lens of this diameter acts like a sail in the wind especially with that huge lens hood-by the way, the hood is included along with a nice padded case. Yes, it''s a bit soft at f/2.8, but it''s not that bad. At first I was disappointed, but you learn to work around it. Do I need f/2.8 or very sharp? Some have complained of warm colors, but not with mine. That would be nice in most outdoor shooting, but not all. My favorite thing about this lens is manually focusing is a joy! The outer focus ring is geared different than internals,making fine focus adjustments easy. And the focus ring has a firm feel to it. No loose,sloppy ring like those cheap lenses. The HSM autofocus is fast paired with my N80, but it seems to hunt just a little bit sometimes. The negatives: you won''t throw this one in the camera bag. And for a lightwetght gear outing, this one will have to stay at home. It''s just too BIG! I guess this is not a real weakness because all zooms in this category are about the same size. The 77mm filter size makes you only get the most important ones you need unless money is not an issue. To make things worse, my 20mm needs 82mm filters(even more expensive) and I use both of them with a 77-82 step up ring. The Cokin P series is a less expensive option, but they are plastic and scratch so easily.

Customer Service

hope I"ll never know :)

Similar Products Used:

Quantaray 70-300 f/4-5.6