Aloha All,Can't spend any more than $1k on a good all-around tele zoom. Narrowed it down to the two lenses below:Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX $890http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/435163-USA/Sigma_569101_70_200mm_f_2_8_EX_DG.html#Canon 70-200mm F4L (no IS) $580http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/183198-USA/Canon_2578A002_70_200mm_f_4_0L_USM_Autofocus.htmlWhat I like about the Sigma is the 2.8 aperture. What I like about the Canon is the L glass, light weight, and low price. I've read great things about the Canon, does anyone have any experience with the Sigma? Any comments/insights is appreciated.Mahalo

Yea i'd like to see some Sigma 70-200 shots vs the Canon version too. Come on you guys put up some pictures!

I haven't owned the canon f4 but I currently have the canon 70-2000 2.8 and I used to have the sigma 2.8.For the money the sigma is a great lens. If you don't mind the size difference I would go with the 2.8 just because it's faster and more versatile but that's all going to depend on what you shoot. I shoot indoor sports so the 2.8 is a necessity.As far as IQ is concerned I think the canon has a bit more punch colorwise, but when I had the sigma I loved it so the difference is not that great. Both were very sharp.As always, my opinion only. -- -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Uzi to Fluzi to twenty dee

Check out these tests by Lightrules:http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/70200exl http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/3telezooms http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/15lbsdNone of the tests put the 2 lenses head to head, but you can, for example, compare the Sigma to the 2.8L and the 2.8L to the 4L.My Sigma 70-200/2.8 is sharp wide open up to 150mm. 200mm is soft and I'm having some focusing problems...I'm sending it to Sigma for calibration/repair. Maybe you could squeak out $150 over your price limit to get the 2.8L...maybe a used 2.8L?Best wishes whatever you choose :-).

My sigma 70-200 2.8 has been back to sigma 3 times in 5 months for focusing problems. Will never buy from them again. I also have the Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS and Recommend it 100%.If you plan on using it Professionally or even for side jobs don't go with the sigma. Not reliable in my experience at all.On another note, If I get a working copy back this time (in about 3 weeks) I'm putting it up for sale. They tell me that they found the design flaw causing the problem but, still to unreliable form me.

While I've had problems with the 70-200/2.8, I also have the 100-300/4 which is a joy to use. Sharp, accurate focus...none of the problems that the 70-200 has. -- --Matthew

I couldn't afford the Canon 70-200L F2.8 and wanted a faster lens than the F4 so I went with the older Sigma 70-200 F2.8 HSM. The Sigma is great and it's sharp at both and it also focuses reasonably fast. I mainly use it for covering sports: swimming, football, and soccer - works well in servo mode. The only thing that would give me pause, if I were you, is whether or not it'll be compatible with future Canon bodies. I decided it was worth the risk.