|
Originally Posted by sameerrao
|
Originally Posted by TT
As expected, Sigma is much crappier.. you pay for what you get :bah:
thanks for proving it once again  |
Sigma 70-200 f2.8 is very good. I have one and am very happy with it. Are you refering to all Sigma lenses or a specific lens  |
Well, for sure the top end Sigma lenses are better than the simpler models, but compared to the Canon or Nikon Equivalent, Sigma never matches the quality, speed and so on, IMO
As for the IS issue, for sure with a 2.8 lense you can play with aperture to have quicker shutter speed,but 2.8 is sometimes just not what you want, especially when going above 100mm where you'd want a deeper depth of field (to have the whole car focused for instance). 200mm is still not terrible, but for sure in some situations, especially on a cloudy day with polarizer filter, you already need an IS. I always carry a tripod too of course, but there are situations where you just can't use it, or long meetings where carrying around a tripod, even a light Manfrotto or whatever, is too complicated.
So IS is definitely a must IMO too. Above 200mm for sure, but IMO when you are investing in a 200mm lense it's probably better to do a bit more efforts and get an IS too, just in case.