Buying a Sigma 70-200 2.8 APO EX

GabrielFFontes · 05-03-2012, 06:35 AM

Hi guys. I'm almost buying a Sigma 70-200 2.8 APO EX (first version, no HSM, no MACRO, no DG). I found one here on my city for 460 dollars. It's supposed to be on great condition, with a little loss of painting on the tripod ring area (apparently, a common problem).
What do you guys think about this lens? I've read here that it's the sharpest version of the 70-200 2.8 line. Is that true?
What about the autofocus speed? Without HSM, isnt there a LOT of glass for the camera motor? Does that make it, like, super slow? (i know usually screwdrive AF is faster than HSM, but...)
Thanks!
EDIT : Uh, also, is it any good with a 2x tc?

**pearsaab** · 05-03-2012, 07:43 AM

that's a killer of a deal...snap it up...there is one for sale on the forum for about 1k and that price is very fair...the lens is awesome...very fast focus and takes beautiful pictures...you will not be disappointed...i have used the 1.4 teleconverter and the pictures were still great and focusing was still fast too...don't let this deal pass...if it is in as good of shape as you say if you don't like it you can resell on forum for more...converts to manual focus with a click of the lens and everything is internal so the lens doesn't get any longer....buy it!!!!

**sergysergy** · 05-03-2012, 07:44 AM

I have not used the other versions, but I am very happy with my pre-HSM version. For $460 is a steal IMO.
The output of the 1.4x TC is very nice. That of the 2x is ok.

GabrielFFontes · 05-03-2012, 08:06 AM

Oh, the seller said he can find only one spec of dust inside the lens. Probably not fungus, right? How can i confirm that its not? I asked him and he said it wasnt, and that the had taken the lens to a store that said it wasnt worth removing that tiny spec, because it wouldnt affect the images. I think i'll pick the lens and take pictures of the sky at f22 to test...right?

**crewl1** · 05-03-2012, 08:35 AM

These Sigmas are not weather sealed so dust is common.

If the speck is under the outermost objective you can confirm it is not fungus by looking at it with a magnifying glass. Here are some examples http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=fungus%20on%20lens

Pictures of the sky at f22 probably wont show anything except dust on your sensor, not the lens.

Usually any problems with lenses just show up as loss in contrast.

GabrielFFontes · 05-03-2012, 09:09 PM

So, what do you guys think? I'm not a professional, i'm just a 14 years old that really enjoy taking pictures. Is it a good lens for me, or is it too big and unnecessary?

**sergysergy** · 05-03-2012, 09:28 PM

Maybe you can ask for pictures of that "dust spec" and go from there?

GabrielFFontes · 05-03-2012, 09:37 PM

Sergy, i asked for pics. He will send them tomorrow, probably

thoughton · 05-04-2012, 02:15 AM

Originally posted by GabrielFFontes

So, what do you guys think? I'm not a professional, i'm just a 14 years old that really enjoy taking pictures. Is it a good lens for me, or is it too big and unnecessary?

What are you planning to use it for? The lens is pretty big and heavy. It can be a bit intimidating for your subject if you use it on people (although the pics are great)

(It's a great lens, fast to focus and beautiful IQ. Works brilliantly with the 1.4x TC as well. It's decent with the 2x TC. )

Here's a small selection of mine (please forgive the neglected state of my Flickr

) with this exact lens.

**Lowell Goudge** · 05-04-2012, 04:05 AM

If the only thing is a spec of dust, this is a great deal. There are several of us who have this lens and use it with and without teleconverters. Takes great shots, and sharper than the macro version, specifically at 200mm and wide open

GabrielFFontes · 05-04-2012, 08:13 AM

I don't really care about intimidating people..my problem is : is it too heavy to carry around all day? I doesn't seem THAT heavy, it will be like 1,5 kg with the camera. Sometimes i take a 5kg bag to school with no problem, so...
Maybe i could buy a better neck strap?
Do you guys know if the AF is faster than the DAL 50-200?
Is it really as fast as on this video ? :

You Tube

Seems like 2 or 3 times faster...
One more question : can i use tc's from other brands? because sigma tc is pretty expensive...

Sorry for the load of questions...its a pretty big lens and i'm not a pro, so i don't wanna buy something that i wont like

**sergysergy** · 05-04-2012, 08:31 AM

I have the 55-300 and the Sigma focuses faster. Maybe you will not use it as you walk around lens from the beginning but if you keep taking pictures you will definitely use it at some point. I have used it a couple of full days, and yes, it is kind of heavy, but with a bag / backpack you should be fine. So if it is just dust I would go ahead and buy it. I would not worry about not liking it. Even if you don't (I doubt it), you can always resell it (for that price I would buy it

).

**NaClH2O** · 05-04-2012, 09:33 AM

I paid over $600 for mine (same version) and thought that was a good deal 2 years ago.

NaCl(I'd be all over that like a duck on a beetle)H2O

GabrielFFontes · 05-04-2012, 03:43 PM

Hey guys!
Here are the dust close ups

What do you guys think? Still worth it?
Now, external pic

As you can see, there's a scratch where the tripod ring is placed

**sergysergy** · 05-04-2012, 05:35 PM

I would say it is dust and not fungus (sb correct me if I am wrong). Is it towards the front or the rear of the lens? anyways for that price you can always get it cleaned (actually that's why I had to do with my copy) and it would still be a good deal.
Also I see "Nikon" in the back. I am assuming that's an adapter?
If you can use it before buying it and it feels ok go ahead and buy it

05-03-2012, 06:35 AM	#1
GabrielFFontes Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Posts: 647	Buying a Sigma 70-200 2.8 APO EX Hi guys. I'm almost buying a Sigma 70-200 2.8 APO EX (first version, no HSM, no MACRO, no DG). I found one here on my city for 460 dollars. It's supposed to be on great condition, with a little loss of painting on the tripod ring area (apparently, a common problem). What do you guys think about this lens? I've read here that it's the sharpest version of the 70-200 2.8 line. Is that true? What about the autofocus speed? Without HSM, isnt there a LOT of glass for the camera motor? Does that make it, like, super slow? (i know usually screwdrive AF is faster than HSM, but...) Thanks! EDIT : Uh, also, is it any good with a 2x tc?

05-04-2012, 03:43 PM	#14
GabrielFFontes Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Posts: 647 Original Poster	Hey guys! Here are the dust close ups What do you guys think? Still worth it? Now, external pic As you can see, there's a scratch where the tripod ring is placed Last edited by GabrielFFontes; 05-04-2012 at 04:51 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Sigma 70-200/2.8 APO EX user impressions	photogerald	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	32	08-12-2016 10:52 PM
The other LBA (Lens Buying Advice) Tamron/Sigma 70-200, Pentax 50-135, or 60-250?	JinDesu	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	08-22-2011 10:42 AM
Difference between sigma 70-200 ex apo and apo ex dg	mpg	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	06-28-2009 07:28 AM
For Sale - Sold: FS. Sigma 70-200 EX DG APO	Duplo	Sold Items	8	03-08-2007 06:35 PM

05-03-2012, 07:43 AM	#2
pearsaab Otis Memorial Pentaxian Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: May 2011 Location: Richmond, Virginia USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,900	that's a killer of a deal...snap it up...there is one for sale on the forum for about 1k and that price is very fair...the lens is awesome...very fast focus and takes beautiful pictures...you will not be disappointed...i have used the 1.4 teleconverter and the pictures were still great and focusing was still fast too...don't let this deal pass...if it is in as good of shape as you say if you don't like it you can resell on forum for more...converts to manual focus with a click of the lens and everything is internal so the lens doesn't get any longer....buy it!!!!

05-03-2012, 07:44 AM	#3
sergysergy Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,171	I have not used the other versions, but I am very happy with my pre-HSM version. For $460 is a steal IMO. The output of the 1.4x TC is very nice. That of the 2x is ok.

05-03-2012, 08:06 AM	#4
GabrielFFontes Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Posts: 647 Original Poster	Oh, the seller said he can find only one spec of dust inside the lens. Probably not fungus, right? How can i confirm that its not? I asked him and he said it wasnt, and that the had taken the lens to a store that said it wasnt worth removing that tiny spec, because it wouldnt affect the images. I think i'll pick the lens and take pictures of the sky at f22 to test...right?

05-03-2012, 08:35 AM	#5
crewl1 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Los Angeles, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,807	These Sigmas are not weather sealed so dust is common. If the speck is under the outermost objective you can confirm it is not fungus by looking at it with a magnifying glass. Here are some examples http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=fungus%20on%20lens Pictures of the sky at f22 probably wont show anything except dust on your sensor, not the lens. Usually any problems with lenses just show up as loss in contrast.

05-03-2012, 09:09 PM	#6
GabrielFFontes Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Posts: 647 Original Poster	So, what do you guys think? I'm not a professional, i'm just a 14 years old that really enjoy taking pictures. Is it a good lens for me, or is it too big and unnecessary?

05-03-2012, 09:28 PM	#7
sergysergy Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,171	Maybe you can ask for pictures of that "dust spec" and go from there?

05-03-2012, 09:37 PM	#8
GabrielFFontes Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Posts: 647 Original Poster	Sergy, i asked for pics. He will send them tomorrow, probably

05-04-2012, 02:15 AM	#9
thoughton Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Saffron Walden, Essex Photos: Gallery Posts: 362	Originally posted by GabrielFFontes So, what do you guys think? I'm not a professional, i'm just a 14 years old that really enjoy taking pictures. Is it a good lens for me, or is it too big and unnecessary? What are you planning to use it for? The lens is pretty big and heavy. It can be a bit intimidating for your subject if you use it on people (although the pics are great) (It's a great lens, fast to focus and beautiful IQ. Works brilliantly with the 1.4x TC as well. It's decent with the 2x TC. ) Here's a small selection of mine (please forgive the neglected state of my Flickr ) with this exact lens.

05-04-2012, 04:05 AM	#10
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,888	If the only thing is a spec of dust, this is a great deal. There are several of us who have this lens and use it with and without teleconverters. Takes great shots, and sharper than the macro version, specifically at 200mm and wide open

05-04-2012, 08:31 AM	#12
sergysergy Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,171	I have the 55-300 and the Sigma focuses faster. Maybe you will not use it as you walk around lens from the beginning but if you keep taking pictures you will definitely use it at some point. I have used it a couple of full days, and yes, it is kind of heavy, but with a bag / backpack you should be fine. So if it is just dust I would go ahead and buy it. I would not worry about not liking it. Even if you don't (I doubt it), you can always resell it (for that price I would buy it ).

05-04-2012, 09:33 AM	#13
NaClH2O Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bronx NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,631	I paid over $600 for mine (same version) and thought that was a good deal 2 years ago. NaCl(I'd be all over that like a duck on a beetle)H2O

05-04-2012, 05:35 PM	#15
sergysergy Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,171	I would say it is dust and not fungus (sb correct me if I am wrong). Is it towards the front or the rear of the lens? anyways for that price you can always get it cleaned (actually that's why I had to do with my copy) and it would still be a good deal. Also I see "Nikon" in the back. I am assuming that's an adapter? If you can use it before buying it and it feels ok go ahead and buy it