Excited...

[jmghart62]

I finally managed to scrape together enough cash to buy a Sigma 70-200 2.8. I know it's probably not as good as the Nikon version, but it's a lot cheaper (£499 from onestop-digital) and the guys I work with have given it some good reviews. I have to go to the courier and collect it after work. Roll on the weekend when I have a hockey match to cover. Can't wait!!

 

[sprog]

Why do you say it's probably not as good as the Nikkor?

The only way the Nikkor outperforms the Sigma is with the Vibration Reduction and paying double for that plus a logo would be a difficult decision for me personally.

 

[alexisonfire]

Have to agree with sprog, all i've heard is that the sigma is excellent, and is on par, if not better optically than the nikon version. I don't think the VR on the nikon version warrants double the price. If you can afford to spend the £1000 asking price, then fair enough

 

[jmghart62]

Don't get me wrong... I wouldn't have bought the Sigma if I didn't rate it. I've had some excellent feedback from various sources. But from what I have read and heard, the Nikon does have a slight edge in quality. But I would have to have had considerably more disposable income for the Nikon to have been a consideration.

 

[sprog]

If enough people say it's better then enough people start believing it.

It's just that some Ninon lenses seem to suffer from perceived value syndrome and more than a little designer tag snobbery, which is a marketing manager's wet-dream.




EDIT: NINON!?!?!?

 

[mrgubby]

I've got the Sigma in Canon fit and it's the bogs dollocks