I'm looking at a new lens for shooting hockey. I've decided to go with the Sigma glass instead of Canon's L series at this point mostly because the arenas I want to shoot at won't allow pro equipment without a media pass. That and cost of course :) But in doing my research I've found the Sigma APO 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG HSM and the APO 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG MACRO HSM. The prices are the same wherever I've looked. Anyone have any opinions either way?

I am primarily looking to shoot hockey but I may do a few other sports just as football and rodeos and perhaps soccer. I rarely shoot nature, which I think the macro would help with but who knows. Maybe I'll get more interested in it.

I say get the non macro version, and then if you get interested in it later on, buy some tubes and you'll be set.

So the arena considers the Canon L a pro lens but not the Sigma 2.8? Seems kinda wierd to me. I know the Canon is the better lens, but anything with a 2.8 aperture is Pro lens in my book.

Z

So the arena considers the Canon L a pro lens but not the Sigma 2.8? Seems kinda wierd to me. I know the Canon is the better lens, but anything with a 2.8 aperture is Pro lens in my book.

The security working the door don't know anything about lenses but I bet they have been told "white" lenses or especially large ones are off limits. I had a Tamron 200-400mm that I used to bring with me and half the time I got hassled. I eventually just started hiding it under other stuff in my bag and hoped they wouldn't dig. I don't know for sure how large the Sigma is but I'm going to guess it won't be too much larger than my current Canon 70-300 which has never caused me any trouble. Thanks for the response!

its a tiny bit smaller than the canon 70-200 f/2.8 USM.