Sigma 70-300 against a 70-200/L

canon400d

I bought a Sigma 70-300 for my 400D and I have read some reviews about the 70-200/4L and wow. Am I right in saying the Canon 70-200 will produce better photos than the Sigma 70-300. I always appreciate your comments and always follow your guidance.
Bob
Dumfries & Galloway
Scotland

gus

canon400d wrote:

I bought a Sigma 70-300 for my 400D and I have read some reviews about the 70-200/4L and wow. Am I right in saying the Canon 70-200 will produce better photos than the Sigma 70-300. I always appreciate your comments and always follow your guidance.
Bob
Dumfries & Galloway
Scotland

The canon is far superior. You really cant compare those 2 lenses as they are so far apart in quality.

canon400d

gus wrote:

The canon is far superior. You really cant compare those 2 lenses as they are so far apart in quality.

I understand what you are saying but am I going to see the difference between the Canon 70-200 and the Sigma 70-300. If not I will not go for the 70-200. I am still confused. Bob

canon400d

canon400d wrote:

I understand what you are saying but am I going to see the difference between the Canon 70-200 and the Sigma 70-300. If not I will not go for the 70-200. I am still confused. Bob

Gus you have answered a lot of my questions in the past and I have always appreciated what you have said and followed your guide lines. I am asking if I should purchase the 70-200 and if I will see the difference.
Cheers Bob

gus

canon400d wrote:

Gus you have answered a lot of my questions in the past and I have always appreciated what you have said and followed your guide lines. I am asking if I should purchase the 70-200 and if I will see the difference.
Cheers Bob

If you can, buy it ...absolutely it will give you better results however i have seen photographers with gear worth many many thousands take shots that are patheticly ordinary & 16 year olds with $250 pocket canons do some amazing work. You can not rely on $ to make you a good photographer what-so-ever but a good lens will serve you well & if you have ability ...at least having a good quality lens wont hold you back. Not suggesting at all that this is your situation but great skills & imagination can overcome many deficiencies. Remember ...Beethoven was deaf.

In short..yes, you will see a marked difference.

PS..at the end of the day if you dont like it...good cond 2nd hand canon L's are always a bit of a hot selling item.

canon400d

gus wrote:

If you can, buy it ...absolutely it will give you better results however i have seen photographers with gear worth many many thousands take shots that are patheticly ordinary & 16 year olds with $250 pocket canons do some amazing work. You can not rely on $ to make you a good photographer what-so-ever but a good lens will serve you well & if you have ability ...at least having a good quality lens wont hold you back. Not suggesting at all that this is your situation but great skills & imagination can overcome many deficiencies. Remember ...Beethoven was deaf.

In short..yes, you will see a marked difference.

Gus I have been guided by you many times before. Are you saying I should go for the 70-200 or not. All I want to know is Gus will I see a big difference between the two. Cheers.

gus

canon400d wrote:

Gus I have been guided by you many times before. Are you saying I should go for the 70-200 or not. All I want to know is Gus will I see a big difference between the two. Cheers.

Did you read my post above ??

I used these phrases :

If you can, buy it ...absolutely it will give you better results

and : In short..yes, you will see a marked difference.

canon400d

canon400d wrote:

Gus I have been guided by you many times before. Are you saying I should go for the 70-200 or not. All I want to know is Gus will I see a big difference between the two. Cheers.

In addition Gus can I ask you I am waiting for my Big Mama but is there anything you would suggest between the 70-300 and the bigmama. I have the 70-300 what would you suggest that is better. I think I made a mistake with the 70-300.

canon400d

gus wrote:

Did you read my post above ??

I used these phrases :

If you can, buy it ...absolutely it will give you better results

and : In short..yes, you will see a marked difference.

Thanks awfully Gus and I apologise. I am totally guided by what you say. Is there a lens you would recommend between the 70-300 and the Bigma
Thanks

Bob

canon400d

Thanks Gus
Thanks Gus for all the sound advice you have given me in the past threads. I am a beginner and you have helped me so much and I would like to show my appreciation.
Bob
Dumfries & Galloway
Scotland

Scott_Quier

Let me add on to what Gus has already said.

• If your technique is up to it, you will see a marked improvement in your photos when using the Canon lens, but
• There's a saying, "The equipment doesn't make the photograph. It makes the photograph possible." So, unless your technique is up to snuff, don't depend on the equipment to magically make your photos SOOO much better.
• All that having been said, buy as much quality in your glass as you can afford. If you go with "L" glass and later decide that photography is not your cup of tea (or need to get out for whatever reason), you will not suffer much on the depreciation. This can not be said of most 3rd-party glass.
• If you are do a lot of hand-holding with your zoom, consider the IS version.
• If you are shooting low-light, consider a faster lens, like the 70-200 f/2.8

OK, the last two suggestions will have significant impact on the wallet, but you may find the consideration worth-while.

sirsloop

http://dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=616445&postcount=7