Canon 70-200mm 2.8 I vs. Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 OS ?

[dragonfly1]

I have decided to start saving for a 70-200mm lens. The two that seem comparable in price are the Canon 70-200mm 2.8 IS I lens and the Sigma 70-200mm OS lens. Which is suggested for a Canon mount?

[scoundrel1728]

The Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS [I] is no longer in production but focuses noticeably faster than the Sigma and has been a lot more popular among Canon users despite its higher price.

[Gene243]

I have my eye on a Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II that I'm saving up for. It will take me a while but the other L glass that I have has convinced me that it is the way to go.

[Jason Hermann]

I have the Canon f/2.8 Version and it is incredible fast and sharp. The new Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II looks awesome, but it is expensive.

I've heard great things about the sigma, but have not had a chance to try it myself yet.

Best,
Jay

[lobsterman]

I have the sigma OS and have no regrets so far.It's very sharp ,fast focus and the OS works well and
is near silent.If weather sealing is not important to you ,then you should be happy with the sigma.

[sparky675]

i picked up a canon 70-200 non is , i did not think i would use IS much at this length, no regrets so far, some fair deals can be picked up as some need the newest and best, I have IS in other lenses. i have a buddy that has the older sigma, very sharp, little slow at focus on sports photography, good luck

[dragonfly1]

Thanks for the feedback everyone!

My main concern with having IS or OS is the performance indoors for wedding photography. Any feedback on that point between IS and non-IS lenses.

I have also considered the F4L non-IS and using it on a tripod/monopod for indoor shots, any idea how well this would work?

[Jason Hermann]

I would totally recommend the IS lens over the non-IS. Especially for low light indoor/wedding work! I can use mine all the way down to 1/10th handheld which allows me to use a lower ISO than 3200. On my Canon 135mm f/2 lens which has No IS, I can only down to about 1/30th or so. That makes a huge difference especially when using such high ISO's and low shutter speeds.

The new IS is supposed to be significantly better that when I have in mine so possible 1/8th of a second hand holding? Incredible.

Best,
Jay

[Rogier]

Originally Posted by dragonfly1

My main concern with having IS or OS is the performance indoors for wedding photography. Any feedback on that point between IS and non-IS lenses.

Indoors I believe the f/2.8 might give you an edge over the f/4 but it comes at a price of course (money and weight). I have the f/2.8 IS II and it is my pride and joy .
The IS allows me to use a slower shutter time without having to increase the ISO too much but if you mainly shoot from a tripod or monopod this might be less of an issue for you.

I have also considered the F4L non-IS and using it on a tripod/monopod for indoor shots, any idea how well this would work?

I would imagine that it might be a lot harder to take shots of situations that simply cannot be repeated, like the smile or tears of the bride or groom. For group photos it could work very well but I would prefer to always have the extra light sensitivity and be able to shoot intimate moments from a distance and not worry too much about shutter times or ISO. Your mileage may vary though and I'm not a wedding photographer, so this is only what I can think of rationally .

If you can, hold out for the f/2.8 IS II and you will not be disappointed, I can guarantee that .

[Duce]

I have the Sigma and am very happy with it ,focus is quick and sharp and a thousand dollars less than the Canon. The accessories are included in the price, I think the tripod mount is extra with the Cannon. The Sigma has a four year warranty the Cannon a one year. I would think you would have to be making wall size prints to see the difference or justify it to your wife.
Duce