The 80-200 should come with a tripod mount. Hmmmmm wonder where it is on
this lens. That is a definite negative for this particular 80-200 auction.
And as far as the Sigma being sharper? I don't agree. The 80-200 is sharper
than the Canon 70-200, let alone the Sigma! The real negatives are the lack
of compatibility with Canon tele-extenders, the EXTREMELY slight vignetting
at the long end, and the lack of USM (HSM on the Sigma). If you definitely
plan on using tele-extenders a lot with this focal length zoom then the
Sigma with a Sigma tele-extender is better than the Canon 80-200 with, say,
a Tamron SP extender. If, however, you plan on mostly using the lens only,
then the Canon is far better in sharpness, color balance, and contrast. For
sports or action, then go for the Sigma due to the HSM. As always, get the
whole story and find the true +/- for any lens purchase. Going straight for
the OEM or the best MTF can be misleading. Make sure the lens capabilities
meet your needs and the lens negatives don't subtract from YOUR
capabilities. I've owned both these lenses and have shot thousands of
frames with both. The above is my observations of the strengths and
weaknesses of both.
FWIW, I sold the Sigma but will keep the 80-200 till Canon obsoletes the
EOS mount. The photos from the 80-200 have a quality about them that I
can't find from any other lens.
Brian Fancher
Save your money and buy the Sigma 70-200HSM for EOS.
Its sharper, can be found used for less, comes with a tripod mounting, and
works with any 1.4x or 2x.
Its a great bargain. The only thing you don't get is the Canon name on the
lens, but I can live with that.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
