Anyone using the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 II macro?

[randomlinh]

Would like input from Canon shooters, but in theory, I guess it shouldn't matter (looking specifically at IQ). I'm looking to try to nab one of these. I need to try and shoot my sister's graduation. Yes, I'll be throwing it on a monopod. Seems that it might be a little soft wide open?

I realize the Canon would most likely be better, and of course IS moreso. But I will probably buy this (used if I can find it) for a month and then sell it. The IS is just too much to front. That and I do want to play with it some, and may just keep it Which is why I don't really want to rent it either.

Anyway, back to the point, looking for input, or convince me not to save the money and just get the canon. I'd rather have the 50-150 from sigma, but I'm afraid it might be too short as I'm not sure where I'll be able to go (and there's no tripod mount)

 

[BornStar]

I can't comment on this lens but I just shot my sister in-law's college graduation this past weekend. I ended up using my XTi and the Tamron 70-300mm f4-5.6 and I had pretty good luck at it. I used it wide open at around 100mm and f4.5 on ISO800 and completely handheld. While it would have been nice to shoot a lower ISO with a larger aperture I don't think it was really necessary for me to do.

Other than resizing this is exactly how it came out of the camera.

I realize this probably isn't extremely helpful, I'm basically just trying to say that unless high ISO really bothers you, you probably don't need a lens as fast as you're looking.

 

[randomlinh]

I pretty much expect to be in the 800/1600 range, heh. I want as much light as possible since I have terrible form with the telephotos to try and reduce shake. I shot with the sigma equivalent at my brother's graduation a few years back and wasn't too happy using it. Although, I have a better camera to handle ISO800 now... and a little more experience. Still curious overall about the lens though, the graduation is partially an excuse to try one out

 

[foghorn67]

Originally posted by: randomlinh
I pretty much expect to be in the 800/1600 range, heh. I want as much light as possible since I have terrible form with the telephotos to try and reduce shake. I shot with the sigma equivalent at my brother's graduation a few years back and wasn't too happy using it. Although, I have a better camera to handle ISO800 now... and a little more experience. Still curious overall about the lens though, the graduation is partially an excuse to try one out

2.8 sometimes doesn't seem like enough in some situations, I can't stand lenses slower than this.
The shot provided above looks okay, but it looks slightly mis-focused (podium looks sharp, grads look slightly soft). Something to consider
when buying a telephoto. Responsive and accurate AF is a priority in the 70-200 2.8 class.
It's great when you have a venue when f4 or f5.6 would work, but you can't depend on that.

That being said, the reason Sigma has a version II of the 70-200 2.8 macro is because the first 'macro' had a horrible softness issue. So I am skeptical about the mark II until I see more real world shots with it.
the best Sigma in this range was the 70-200 2.8 DG. Technically the only difference is the lens coating. But their quality control was at it's best when they made the DG.
here is the releases in order

70-200 2.8 HSM
70-200 2.8 HSM DG <---get this one unless you know for sure macro II is okay.
70-200 2.8 HSM Macro
70-200 2.8 HSM Macro II (note that the mark I was released not too long ago.)
--edit--They all have the 'EX' moniker. EX indicates Sigma's pro line.

 

[Zenmervolt]

I have an old version (non-macro, non-DG) of this lens that I use a good deal with my A700. I'm very, very fond of it. If you're OK going used, the two non-Macro lenses can be found for around $500 and they are tanks. There usually isn't much (if any) difference in price between the DG and non-DG versions of the original, so I would agree with Foghorn's recommendation to get the DG version. Still, the non-DG version has worked well for me and if you stumble across a deal on one, there's no real reason to avoid it.

ZV

 

[randomlinh]

The DG non macro is what I was initially after since it would have been far cheaper. But I've been looking for a week and it seems everyone is offloading the 70-200 IS, haha. Only a few months ago I remember seeing a whole bunch of the non-macros FS.

 

[Alyx]

Originally posted by: foghorn67

70-200 2.8 HSM
70-200 2.8 HSM DG <---get this one unless you know for sure macro II is okay.
70-200 2.8 HSM Macro
70-200 2.8 HSM Macro II (note that the mark I was released not too long ago.)
--edit--They all have the 'EX' moniker. EX indicates Sigma's pro line.

I muse agree. This is what I've always heard too. I use the HSM DG lens and love it.

 

[randomlinh]

blah, seems like the DG non macro is still over $700 from places like KEH... I might just go w/ the macro II to have that 3/4yr warranty From some of the samples it looks pretty good. I'm not really pixel peeping it, but it can't be terrible, I love my 30mm, heh.

or alternatively get a 135L and deal w/ the lack of zoom... heh

 

[foghorn67]

Originally posted by: randomlinh
blah, seems like the DG non macro is still over $700 from places like KEH... I might just go w/ the macro II to have that 3/4yr warranty From some of the samples it looks pretty good. I'm not really pixel peeping it, but it can't be terrible, I love my 30mm, heh.

or alternatively get a 135L and deal w/ the lack of zoom... heh

Sometimes it worth a shot to get a new lens if the price is right. At the very worst, you'll have to spend a few minutes with the reseller to return it.
I suggest someone reputable with a good return policy.

--edit--have you tried the the buy and sell forums at POTN and Fred Miranda? 700 seems a tad pricey.

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: randomlinh
blah, seems like the DG non macro is still over $700 from places like KEH... I might just go w/ the macro II to have that 3/4yr warranty From some of the samples it looks pretty good. I'm not really pixel peeping it, but it can't be terrible, I love my 30mm, heh.

or alternatively get a 135L and deal w/ the lack of zoom... heh

Sometimes it worth a shot to get a new lens if the price is right. At the very worst, you'll have to spend a few minutes with the reseller to return it.
I suggest someone reputable with a good return policy.

--edit--have you tried the the buy and sell forums at POTN and Fred Miranda? 700 seems a tad pricey.

I've been on there every few hours this week whenever I can (I'm almost literally serious.. heh). I see lots of 4L's, both IS and non-IS.. and lots of 2.8L IS's actually, a few 2.8L's. But no Sigma's. While I could do the used 2.8L, I really would rather have a new lens at it's ~$950 I keep seeing it for. And I still have the monopod to budget for.

Missed out on a non-DG ebay one.. but I am a little weary of going to ebay for this.

 

[montanafan]

I have the DG Macro HSM. I use it for indoor sports and football under the lights. I really like the lens. It can be a little soft at times, but nothing that can't be taken care of in post-processing. Some samples:

Football
Basketball
Football

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: montanafan
I have the DG Macro HSM. I use it for indoor sports and football under the lights. I really like the lens. It can be a little soft at times, but nothing that can't be taken care of in post-processing. Some samples:

Football
Basketball
Football

The basketball shot... was that just gym lighting or did you have some off camera lights set up? and what were your settings? I think I'll take the risk and plunge for it. It's the same price everywhere it seems so I'll grab it from bh or adorama.. maybe amazon.

 

[foghorn67]

Originally posted by: randomlinh

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: randomlinh
blah, seems like the DG non macro is still over $700 from places like KEH... I might just go w/ the macro II to have that 3/4yr warranty From some of the samples it looks pretty good. I'm not really pixel peeping it, but it can't be terrible, I love my 30mm, heh.

or alternatively get a 135L and deal w/ the lack of zoom... heh

Sometimes it worth a shot to get a new lens if the price is right. At the very worst, you'll have to spend a few minutes with the reseller to return it.
I suggest someone reputable with a good return policy.

--edit--have you tried the the buy and sell forums at POTN and Fred Miranda? 700 seems a tad pricey.

I've been on there every few hours this week whenever I can (I'm almost literally serious.. heh). I see lots of 4L's, both IS and non-IS.. and lots of 2.8L IS's actually, a few 2.8L's. But no Sigma's. While I could do the used 2.8L, I really would rather have a new lens at it's ~$950 I keep seeing it for. And I still have the monopod to budget for.

Missed out on a non-DG ebay one.. but I am a little weary of going to ebay for this.

I would avoid ebay when it comes to lenses. Better safe than sorry.
--edit--When I was looking for a Sigma, they seem to come in like the tide. There are several for sale at a time, then all of a sudden, you are searching for one.

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: randomlinh

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: randomlinh
blah, seems like the DG non macro is still over $700 from places like KEH... I might just go w/ the macro II to have that 3/4yr warranty From some of the samples it looks pretty good. I'm not really pixel peeping it, but it can't be terrible, I love my 30mm, heh.

or alternatively get a 135L and deal w/ the lack of zoom... heh

Sometimes it worth a shot to get a new lens if the price is right. At the very worst, you'll have to spend a few minutes with the reseller to return it.
I suggest someone reputable with a good return policy.

--edit--have you tried the the buy and sell forums at POTN and Fred Miranda? 700 seems a tad pricey.

I've been on there every few hours this week whenever I can (I'm almost literally serious.. heh). I see lots of 4L's, both IS and non-IS.. and lots of 2.8L IS's actually, a few 2.8L's. But no Sigma's. While I could do the used 2.8L, I really would rather have a new lens at it's ~$950 I keep seeing it for. And I still have the monopod to budget for.

Missed out on a non-DG ebay one.. but I am a little weary of going to ebay for this.

I would avoid ebay when it comes to lenses. Better safe than sorry.
--edit--When I was looking for a Sigma, they seem to come in like the tide. There are several for sale at a time, then all of a sudden, you are searching for one.

yeah, ebay was out of desperation, haha. I'm far to impatient. That and I'd like to get a good couple of weeks before my sister's graduation to actually learn how to use it on a monopod effectively

 

[montanafan]

Originally posted by: randomlinh

Originally posted by: montanafan
I have the DG Macro HSM. I use it for indoor sports and football under the lights. I really like the lens. It can be a little soft at times, but nothing that can't be taken care of in post-processing. Some samples:

Football
Basketball
Football

The basketball shot... was that just gym lighting or did you have some off camera lights set up? and what were your settings? I think I'll take the risk and plunge for it. It's the same price everywhere it seems so I'll grab it from bh or adorama.. maybe amazon.

Sorry it's taken me a while to get back to you; I haven't been online as much since we've had some nice golfing weather.

The settings for the basketball photo were f/2.8, ISO 800, and 1/640th. It was taken with ambient light, no flash or strobes, but it was a very well lit arena. It's a very nice lens, but it is just a 2.8, and the quality of the lighting at the venue makes a big difference. You need at least 1/400th to 1/500th to freeze basketball action and in some high school gyms you can get that, and in some others you need flash.

This was taken without flash or strobes at a small high school gym with average lighting, but very white walls. The settings were f/2.8, ISO 1600, and 1/500th.
Basketball w/o flash

These two were taken with flash in dimly lit gyms where I just couldn't get the shutter speed I needed with ambient light. The flash was a Canon Speedlight 430EX set at ETTL. Settings for the first one were f/2.8, ISO 1600, 1/200th (the flash sync speed for the Rebel XT). Settings for the second one were f/4, ISO 1600, 1/200th.
Basketball with flash 1
Basketball with flash 2

The Canon f/1.8 85mm is the best lens for indoor sports like basketball, but even it could use some fill flash in the most dimly lit gyms. Example at settings of f/2.2, ISO 1600, 1/500th.
Basketball 85mm

The F/2.8 70-200mm is a good lens, but depending on the conditions at the indoor venue where you'll be shooting, you may or may not need flash.

 

[randomlinh]

Yeah, I've shot basketball once w/ my digital rebel and the 85. I love that lens. I caved and bought the 70-200 macro, it's sitting at UPS ready for pick up I may have to sell my 85 though... I love it's speed and quiet AF, but I don't really use it. And the 70-200 will work as a decent portrait lens, albeit a tad long on a crop (I'd rather have a 50-150 probably). We'll see how much I like the lens I guess.

 

[randomlinh]

sigh, only my 2nd new lens. my used sigmas panned out better, haha. it seems a bit soft wide open (softer than some samples I've seen) and it front focuses I'm also not too sure on this range anymore either. I may have significantly underestimated how much the extra weight would bother me. 50-150 or 50-135 I guess now... I'm not sure the extra range helps me if I can't steady it well enough in low light. Stopped down a bit it really is nice though.