Which Lens To Buy for my Canon 70D?

[PhotoBug7]

Hello Canon Community,

I am new to the forum and already had my question answered regarding Image Stabilization.  So after getting some feedback on that here is my dillema.  I am in need of a 70-200 2.8 lens with image stabilzation.  As much as I'd love to buy the Canon IS II USM for $2000, I just cant spend that much right now.  So, I am looking at reccomendations for these 2 other alternatives:

The Tamron 70-200 2.8 Di VC USD for $1,500 or

The Sigma APO 70-200 2.8 EX DG OS HSM for $1,150

Someone on the forum said that the Sigma was not weather sealed and vulnerable to dust and moisture.  I dont know??? I'm usually very protective of my lenses.  If its raining, I shut it down and cover my stuff up. 

Is it worth it to spend $350 more for the Tamron.  Or, is that weather seal a big deal, or was this just some person being picky or biased.

THANKS for the help!!

[cicopo]

There is another variable that hasn't been mentioned & that is just how will your images be used now & in the next year or 2 as you get up to speed in skill & equipment. Will they mainly be on line or printed on newsprint or will they be used for true photo quality prints, & if so just how big (average)? Will you have enough magnification to get the shot without cropping deeply? If you can fill the frame & they won't be made into really large prints any of these lenses will likely do the job now & down the road. How are your panning skills? That may also hurt IQ no matter what lens you use if it's not really good & the venue requires a low shutter speed like motor racing does. There is more to this than just having the best lens available.

[ebiggs1]

"ICYMI    "The lenses are the best in their respective ranges.""

Whatever, that is not what I said or meant. 

[TTMartin]

---

@PhotoBug7 wrote:

Hello Canon Community,

I am new to the forum and already had my question answered regarding Image Stabilization.  So after getting some feedback on that here is my dillema.  I am in need of a 70-200 2.8 lens with image stabilzation.  As much as I'd love to buy the Canon IS II USM for $2000, I just cant spend that much right now.  So, I am looking at reccomendations for these 2 other alternatives:

The Tamron 70-200 2.8 Di VC USD for $1,500 or

The Sigma APO 70-200 2.8 EX DG OS HSM for $1,150

Someone on the forum said that the Sigma was not weather sealed and vulnerable to dust and moisture.  I dont know??? I'm usually very protective of my lenses.  If its raining, I shut it down and cover my stuff up. 

Is it worth it to spend $350 more for the Tamron.  Or, is that weather seal a big deal, or was this just some person being picky or biased.

THANKS for the help!!

---

Don't rule out the Canon EF 70-200 f/4L IS from your choices. Modern dSLRs easily give you a full ISO stop better light performance than ones from 10 years ago.  And even with the Tamron or Sigma stopped down to f/4, the Canon still has better image quality than either of them.

[Waddizzle]

"Someone on the forum said that the Sigma was not weather sealed and vulnerable to dust and moisture.  I dont know??? I'm usually very protective of my lenses.  If its raining, I shut it down and cover my stuff up."

I think I said it.  If you seriously want to be a sports photographer, then you don't get to make the call regarding weather.  Weather sealing does more than protect your gear when you're shooting.  It adds a level of protection against mold and mildew over the lifetime of the lens, too.

I think the above suggestion for the EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM is probably your best option in your apparent budget range. 

Also, I would invest in Adobe Lightroom, which is like a souped up version of Canon's Digital Photo Professional.  Whether you get the stand-alone version, or not, is up to you.  I recommend the stand-alone version, which I suspect will not be available for very much longer.  Adobe Photoshop is useful if you are creative enough to edit images, although artistic skill is not really required to use at least half the features.

[PhotoBug7]

To all who answered my question on which lens to buy for my Canon 70D the Tamron or the Sigma 70-200 2.8, thank you so much.  Your answers really help.  When I said I was being hired to shoot sports professionally, its not Iike I was hired by Sports Illustrated or ESPN Magazine.  If I was at that level, no question I would have bought the $2,000 Canon lens. 

To sum up all the answers I received:

Sounds like I wouldn't be able to tell the difference anyway

As a general rule, Sigma makes the better of the two (Sigma vs Tamron)

But, the Tamron 70-200 2.8 Di VC USD is probably better than the Sigma version

Tamron looks better in the center & edges

By the way, there are 2 high end camera stores in St. Louis. One caters to the professional more than the other.  One only carries Sigma, the other one carries Sigma and Tamron.

Bottom line is, my choice and I probably couldnt go wrong with either.

Again, THANK YOU ALL FOR THE ADVICE, it was very helpful.

Scott

[ebiggs1]

"Bottom line is, my choice and I probably couldnt go wrong with either."

[ScottyP]

---

@PhotoBug7 wrote:

To all who answered my question on which lens to buy for my Canon 70D the Tamron or the Sigma 70-200 2.8, thank you so much.  Your answers really help.  When I said I was being hired to shoot sports professionally, its not Iike I was hired by Sports Illustrated or ESPN Magazine.  If I was at that level, no question I would have bought the $2,000 Canon lens. 

To sum up all the answers I received:

Sounds like I wouldn't be able to tell the difference anyway

As a general rule, Sigma makes the better of the two (Sigma vs Tamron)

But, the Tamron 70-200 2.8 Di VC USD is probably better than the Sigma version

Tamron looks better in the center & edges

By the way, there are 2 high end camera stores in St. Louis. One caters to the professional more than the other.  One only carries Sigma, the other one carries Sigma and Tamron.

Bottom line is, my choice and I probably couldnt go wrong with either.

Again, THANK YOU ALL FOR THE ADVICE, it was very helpful.

Scott

---

If you have not just one but two camera stores in your town you are lucky.  The Internet has killed all the camera stores in most towns and even most good-sized cities.  

[PhotoBug7]

Yeah, in St. Louis there is a well repsected local chain that deals with pros and amateurs.  However, there is a one location store that most pros go to that has been in business since the late 1800s. 

[PhotoBug7]

I want to thank everyone for answering my questions on what lens to buy.  I know I probabably drove you guys crazy.  I was asking which 70-200mm 2.8 lens to buy for sports photography and it was between the Tamron and Sigma.  The Canon was very expensive.  However, what an interesting turn of events!  I just found a used Canon 70-200mm, 2.8 lens with the Image Stabilization!!  The price isnt bad.  Same as a new Tamron.  But from what you all send, the Canon is bsolutely the best quality lens in many facets!!

[Waddizzle]

---

@PhotoBug7 wrote:

I want to thank everyone for answering my questions on what lens to buy.  I know I probabably drove you guys crazy.  I was asking which 70-200mm 2.8 lens to buy for sports photography and it was between the Tamron and Sigma.  The Canon was very expensive.  However, what an interesting turn of events!  I just found a used Canon 70-200mm, 2.8 lens with the Image Stabilization!!  The price isnt bad.  Same as a new Tamron.  But from what you all send, the Canon is bsolutely the best quality lens in many facets!!

---

It sounds like it may be the original version of the f/2.8 with Image Stabilization.  Discussions have centered around the Mark 2 version of the lens.  Hopefully, the lens is in good shape, has the tripod foot, and a fair asking price.  Enjoy it.

A word of caution.  The lens is quite heavy, and due its' high moment of inertia [center of gravity is far from the lens' mount] will produce a lot of torque on the camera's lens mount.  Support the lens when it is mounted to the camera to reduce the stress on the camera body.  Canon's professional camera bodies are much stronger [and reinforced, too] than Canon's ##D camera bodies.. 

The camera has a much lower moment of inertia [center of gravity of camera is much closer to lens mount than what the lens CoG is], so the stress on the mount is greatly reduced when you support the lens, and allow the weight of the camera to pull/drag on the mount. 

I use the tripod foot on lenses that have them as a handle in the palm of my hand when going handheld.

[EDIT]  Download the manual from the following link.  Begin typing the model number, followed by a space, and a dropdown menu appears after a brief delay. Select your model number from the list.

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/support/