April 21, 2015 at 11:29AM


70-200mm Lenses. Canon or the Sigma?

I use Canon 5D Mk.III and right now I only have 24-105mm and the 50mm lenses, and I felt in need for a telephoto lens so I was looking at different kind of lenses that I can buy. All my lenses are Canon lenses and I've seen people use Sigma lenses and because of the fact that it is from different manufacture than my camera and it's also significantly cheaper than Canon lenses it held me back from getting a Sigma lenses. I'm a video guy but I enjoy photography very much as well. Can you guys tell me the difference between the Sigma's "APO 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM" and the Canon's "Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Lens". Is Canon's 70-200mm worth paying $900 more for the same lens? Thank you.


I've been told that the main difference is build quality. The Canon lens has superior build quality and is dust-proof and moisture-proof. It's a tough argument to spend $900 more on a lens that will give you the same picture but, Canon is Canon and if you have the money to spend on Canon's build quality, do it. Although, $900 is almost another lens. Good luck!

April 22, 2015 at 12:09PM

Adolph Lopez

Thank you! Do you know if those two lenses have difference in Active Image Stabilization?
Meaning like, if I were to take video while owning one of those lenses, Canon works better for example or anything like that?

Paul HyunBin Kim

April 23, 2015 at 4:21PM

I know lot of people gives Sigma a great hype, but from my experience I would not touch sigma unless you are in a budget. Again this is from my experience, I had good copies of the lenses and also bad copies from Sigma. And when you do get a bad copy, you will know you have it. The QC(quality control) from Sigma is really not good. Lot of hit or miss. And resale value on Sigma is way way cheaper compare to original brands.
Just my background, I own lot of Nikkors and Nikon cameras personally and for work I run 5D mkIII as well and have couple of L lenses as well.
Again this is all my opinion from my experience with third party manufacturers. FYI I had a some really good copy as well from Sigma, but for me it's not worth taking a risk to see if I get a good copy of the lens or not.

April 22, 2015 at 2:38PM

Keith Kim

Apparently Sigma lenses have a wide variety of quality within the same lens specification. I know one photographer who had one of their 18mm lenses, and he said it was the sharpest lens he owned! But then he tried a different one that belonged to a friend and it was terrible. So his resolution wsaa to only buy a lens he could test. He'd take his camera into the store and shoot with different lenses until he found a good one. Then he'd buy that one. Good luck!

April 22, 2015 at 8:10PM

Tom Henderson
Commercial Photographer

I believe they are pretty much on par when it comes to image stabilization but I do know the Canon lens is a lot quieter. This may not be important to you but, for someone covering something like a wedding, it does. The best thing to do is rent both lenses and get a feel for them both. Some local camera places will rent you the lens and if you decide to buy one they will subtract it from your total. Good luck!

April 25, 2015 at 11:10AM

Adolph Lopez

what about tamron?

December 29, 2015 at 1:36PM

Silvio D'Angelo
Camera Operator

Tamron are an excellent option as long as you can deal with minor chromatic aberration. Their 24-70mm model with IS is a real workhorse for event videography. The 70-200mm has less CA, but we don't shoot those focal lengths as often on APS-C. There is a dramatic variation in lens quality depending on the production run.

Marc B

June 1, 2017 at 2:08PM

Your Comment