helged Posted August 19 Share #41 Posted August 19 Advertisement (gone after registration) On 8/18/2025 at 3:48 PM, cdnchris said: I wonder if those images from photorumors are real - it would be very interesting to see Sigma market the lens with images showing an e-mount lens adapted to a Nikon body Re Sigma on Nikon bodies, a resounding BRAVO from Dariusz Bres: https://dariuszbres.pl/sigma-200-2-dg-os-sports/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 19 Posted August 19 Hi helged, Take a look here Sigma 200mm F2 Rumor. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Archiver Posted August 20 Share #42 Posted August 20 I'm curious about how a 200mm f2 lens might be used. As someone who shoots sports, both indoor and outdoor, I can kind of see it as useful for some scenarios but not others. It could be great for indoor games like basketball or futsal when the subject is on the other side of the court; it could be useful for night time track meets when the athletes are running at a suitable distance; also useful for indoor situations like classical concerts and musicals. But it might not so useful for wide ground sports like football or rugby, where the action can take place across a very long field and 200mm isn't long enough. For outdoor sports like football, I prefer zoom lenses in the 100-400 range, and crop in post where necessary. 200mm just isn't long enough for those situations. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leica_kh Posted August 20 Share #43 Posted August 20 40 minutes ago, Archiver said: I'm curious about how a 200mm f2 lens might be used. As someone who shoots sports, both indoor and outdoor, I can kind of see it as useful for some scenarios but not others. It could be great for indoor games like basketball or futsal when the subject is on the other side of the court; it could be useful for night time track meets when the athletes are running at a suitable distance; also useful for indoor situations like classical concerts and musicals. But it might not so useful for wide ground sports like football or rugby, where the action can take place across a very long field and 200mm isn't long enough. For outdoor sports like football, I prefer zoom lenses in the 100-400 range, and crop in post where necessary. 200mm just isn't long enough for those situations. I'm interested to know how much better image quality-wise this lens is compared to the 70-200 f2.8 brethren? Yes, I'm aware the 70-200 is a 2.8 but that's not an issue for me. But the versatility is a consideration for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
helged Posted August 20 Share #44 Posted August 20 32 minutes ago, leica_kh said: I'm interested to know how much better image quality-wise this lens is compared to the 70-200 f2.8 brethren? Yes, I'm aware the 70-200 is a 2.8 but that's not an issue for me. But the versatility is a consideration for me. Interesting question - and hard to know before comparisons are being made. The Sigma 70-200 f2.8 DG DN is a very, very fine zoom (the Leica version as well, but I have only experience with Sigma), easily matching the SL3 60+ MP sensor. Shooting wide-ish open, I expect the 200mm to be sharper across the image and to have a more flat focus plane than the zoom. I also expect the prime to have a less busy out-of-focus rendering, as well as being less prone to flare than the zoom. The AF and/or stabilisation may be somewhat improved compared to the zoom, although the zoom is already very good here. Yes,would be interesting to see some real life comparisons! I am somewhat interested in the 200mm prime. If I get it, I certainly will run some comparisons wide open, and at f5.6, say. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivar B Posted August 20 Share #45 Posted August 20 I see that some reviewers who got their samples early are posting reviews, and this seems to be an extraordinarily good lens optically. Sigma does it again. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 20 Share #46 Posted August 20 Not for me - regardless of IQ, it is far too much of a beast. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! 1 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/421036-sigma-200mm-f2-rumor/?do=findComment&comment=5851016'>More sharing options...
wellfleet Posted August 20 Author Share #47 Posted August 20 Advertisement (gone after registration) 48 minutes ago, jaapv said: Not for me - regardless of IQ, it is far too much of a beast. Agreed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan1985 Posted August 20 Share #48 Posted August 20 I owned the Canon 200mm f1.8 and also the f2.0. These are absolute niche lenses fulfilling a certain purpose. Usually they are used for indoor sports in halls where you often have not the best light conditions and need a fast lens. 200mm is really a sweet spot for that. But you can also use it for a bit of wildlife photography with an extender. But I mostly just was interested in using it for portrait photography. They images you get with such a lens are kind of magic with a wonderful bokeh and a lot of compression. But it was more something like a test. After a short amount of time I sold these lenses. It‘s even a more specialist lens as the 50 Noctilux. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photon42 Posted August 20 Share #49 Posted August 20 First Look of the beast Audio track can be switched to English in case you have trouble with German ... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 20 Share #50 Posted August 20 3 hours ago, Jan1985 said: I owned the Canon 200mm f1.8 and also the f2.0. These are absolute niche lenses fulfilling a certain purpose. Usually they are used for indoor sports in halls where you often have not the best light conditions and need a fast lens. 200mm is really a sweet spot for that. But you can also use it for a bit of wildlife photography with an extender. But I mostly just was interested in using it for portrait photography. They images you get with such a lens are kind of magic with a wonderful bokeh and a lot of compression. But it was more something like a test. After a short amount of time I sold these lenses. It‘s even a more specialist lens as the 50 Noctilux. Problem with an extender: The 2x is insufficient quality (for a lens of this level) and loses two stops. The 1.4x is excellent and only loses one stop, but just extends to 280 mm which is not even close to the 400 which is a minimum for most wildlife photography. It is indeed a specialist lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leica_kh Posted August 20 Share #51 Posted August 20 2 hours ago, jaapv said: Problem with an extender: The 2x is insufficient quality (for a lens of this level) and loses two stops. The 1.4x is excellent and only loses one stop, but just extends to 280 mm which is not even close to the 400 which is a minimum for most wildlife photography. It is indeed a specialist lens. Unfortunately, the Sigma cannot accept a teleconverter. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boojay Posted August 20 Share #52 Posted August 20 2 hours ago, jaapv said: Problem with an extender: The 2x is insufficient quality (for a lens of this level) and loses two stops. The 1.4x is excellent and only loses one stop, but just extends to 280 mm which is not even close to the 400 which is a minimum for most wildlife photography. It is indeed a specialist lens. Just to be clear - the Sigma 200mm F/2 will not take extenders, Sigma 8/20/2025 UPDATE FROM SIGMA: 200/2 is NOT compatible with teleconverters. There are physical engineering challenges, and IQ would not be up to the standard Sigma set for this lens without a TC. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 20 Share #53 Posted August 20 Just responding to the post above mine. I would not use any extender on a 200, and so would Sigma, it seems. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archiver Posted August 21 Share #54 Posted August 21 15 hours ago, Jan1985 said: I owned the Canon 200mm f1.8 and also the f2.0. These are absolute niche lenses fulfilling a certain purpose. Usually they are used for indoor sports in halls where you often have not the best light conditions and need a fast lens. 200mm is really a sweet spot for that. But you can also use it for a bit of wildlife photography with an extender. Yes, this is much what I thought such a lens would fulfill. It's long enough and fast enough to grab court action in basketball, netball, futsal etc in challenging lighting conditions. You would pair it with a fast standard zoom on another body for when the action gets close to you. As a tangent, I've mentioned this on another forum: the Sony 28-70mm f2 and 50-150mm f2 would solve at least 90% of my shooting situations, with the exception of long outdoor field and oval sports. I just don't want to sink about $15-17k into yet another system right now, not to mention have to deal with Sony handling and menus. So I stick with L mount and micro four thirds and do what I can. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan1985 Posted August 21 Share #55 Posted August 21 vor 43 Minuten schrieb Archiver: Yes, this is much what I thought such a lens would fulfill. It's long enough and fast enough to grab court action in basketball, netball, futsal etc in challenging lighting conditions. You would pair it with a fast standard zoom on another body for when the action gets close to you. As a tangent, I've mentioned this on another forum: the Sony 28-70mm f2 and 50-150mm f2 would solve at least 90% of my shooting situations, with the exception of long outdoor field and oval sports. I just don't want to sink about $15-17k into yet another system right now, not to mention have to deal with Sony handling and menus. So I stick with L mount and micro four thirds and do what I can. The overall handling and UI of Sony menus still make me avoiding these cameras. I thought about it for my filmmaking. But I now will go for the SL3-S even if you can just record in APS-C when you 4K 60fps. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeleElmar135mm Posted August 22 Share #56 Posted August 22 As I write in the German forum: Even with the 70-200 Sigma, most wishes regarding sharpness and exposure remain marginal - I would say. But the size and weight of the 200/2.0 would prevent me from buying it in everyday life, even if it might be a bit better/sharper. At boarding school. I've posted something about this on page 3. The emus pictures were taken leaning over a garden gate (I was allowed) and standing on a park bench that was wobbly. I was glad it wasn't the new Sigma. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robb Posted August 26 Share #57 Posted August 26 Owned the canon 200 1.8 currently own the canon 200 2.0 which I use on sl2-s and sl2 with sigma ef to L mount adapters. Also swap it to canon R3 if fast AF is required. primary uses for me are indoor corporate / conference events and meetings, portraits, corporate aviation, nighttime photojournalism, and arenas. basketball, tennis, hockey, indoor business, nighttime motorsports, etc… also used by photographers who don’t want to go with the flow of the 70-200 crowd. Robb 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 26 Share #58 Posted August 26 Lost me there… what do you mean by “flow of the 70-200 crowd “? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
topoxforddoc Posted August 26 Share #59 Posted August 26 Looks like a fabulous lens. But I’ll keep using my 180/2 Apo Summicron instead. Just my favourite low light concert lens. Renders beautifully wide open and remarkably easy to focus manually on my old DMR or my current SL2 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robb Posted August 26 Share #60 Posted August 26 12 hours ago, jaapv said: Lost me there… what do you mean by “flow of the 70-200 crowd “? In my opinion…. Less seasoned photographers and those brand new typically get a 70-200 and or 24-70, the pair of one and done lenses. some add a wide zoom for the “trinity”where you don’t have to work quite as hard or plan with your skillset. Just zoom…. in order to separate the look of their images from that typical crowd, you’ll see much smaller number of shooters and those more experienced grabbing faster primes like 35 1.4, 85 1.4, 200 f2. are sharp zooms valuable? Yes. Do I prefer to use them? Not really compared to faster aperture primes. Are there some places where the 70-200 is essential? Yes. do I want to shoot with the same gear as my competition? No hence the “70-200 crowd” vs the alternates 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now