Sigma 70-200 f2.8 (non OS) lens review

When it comes to sports photograph everyone wants a 70-200 f2.8 lens.  The problem is the price makes it out of reach for many of those just starting out.  In steps Sigma with its 70-200 f2.8 lens.  About 25% or more below the price of Canon or Nikon it is a very attractive lens.  But does it hold up?

You can look around online and find all kinds of answers to this question.  Some swear it does while other says it is worthless.  I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

The Sigma 70-200 (non OS) is very capable of producing some very high quality images.  In fact, I dare anyone to actually tell the difference between an in focus shot made with a Sigma compared to a Canon or Nikon.  In most situations they will not be able to.

Sure lab tests of lines and patterns analyzed by computer programs show the Canon and Nikon have better image quality.  But how many of us are going to be photographing items like that?


In the real world when you get a good shot with the Sigma it is pretty much indistinguishable to the brand name lenses.

But their is a catch.  The Sigma is not as reliable as those lenses.  Although improved over the years, the Sigma lenses have been know to have problems.  While one lens may never experience and issue another copy of the same lens may be sent in for adjustments and repairs several times.  Is this a reason to avoid this lens, maybe.  Maybe not it depends on you.

If you are wanting to be a professional photographer it probably is enough of a reason.  If you are a casual photographer on a budget, I would not let this hold you back from this lens.

Even if you do not have build issues with the lens you have to understand this lens is not built as solid as lets say the Canon 70-200 f 2.8 L series.  The Canon version is a pro series lens that is built to be durable and stand the test of time.  That is not is say the Sigma is cheaply built.  It is a very nice lens.  But it is not built to the same specs as the Canon.

The biggest issue I have with the Sigma is the speed that it acquires focus.  Don't get me wrong it is fast.  Just not as fast as the Canon version of this lens.  It is much fast than a kit lens and in all but the most demanding situations it will be more than adequate for most.

I shoot a lot of sports.  And the ability to switch from one player to anther and quickly achieve focus is critical.  With the Sigma I find that I miss about 20% more shots than I do with the Canon in this situation.  While it is still a huge leap above shooting with a kit lens, it still means I miss a lot of really good shots.

The big benefit with these F2.8 lenses is the ability to shoot night games.  With your kit lens this is all but impossible if you want decent quality images.  Just like the Canon, the Sigma does not disappoint in low light situations.  I found the Sigma to be very comparable to the Canon in low light situations.

Bottom line if you are on a budget and want to photograph in doors or at night this is probably the lens for you.  But if you can afford to spend the extra money, I would highly recommend you go with the more expensive and more reliable brand name versions of this lens.