Nikon 70-200 2.8: talk me out of completing the holy trinity

[Dangleman]

As the title. I really want it, but not entirely sure i neeeeed it. I have the sigma 70-200 2.8 (non macro first version), which is very very nice, and sharp, but I want the Nikon. I've got the Nikon 14-24, 28-70 and it seems wrong not to complete the circle

on a semi serious note, I do do a fair amount of corporate jobs that are indoors and bad light and the VR is what's swinging me, as I'm often having to push the D3 iso to the max to get a shot, which although amazing it can even get a usable pic at iso 6400, it isn't ideal.

So, plus and minus points appreciated and anyone who has the Nikon one and has used a siggy version I'd love to hear your thoughts!

 

[whitey]

Having used the Sigma 70-200 (Both versions) and just putting the 70-200 VR onto the camera all i say is WOW, i got a used one earlier in the week and its fantastic, quite an upgrade IMO from the sigma lenses

dont get me wrong the Sigma lenses are fantasic value for money/quality but the Nikon is onto the next level

you wont be disappointed int he Nikkor

Sorry if thats not the answer you were looking/hoping for

 

[Dangleman]

Having used the Sigma 70-200 (Both versions) and just putting the 70-200 VR onto the camera all i say is WOW, i got a used one earlier in the week and its fantastic, quite an upgrade IMO from the sigma lenses

dont get me wrong the Sigma lenses are fantasic value for money/quality but the Nikon is onto the next level

you wont be disappointed int he Nikkor

Sorry if thats not the answer you were looking/hoping for

We all know how the talk equipment board is. It's normally full of people just looking for moral backing to blow a **** load of cash for no good reason. Like I am

 

[Flash In The Pan]

Plus points? The optics, the build quality, the VR. Minus points? The price and err......that's it

 

[whitey]

In that case, Perfect upgrade :d

 

[DiddyDave]

Sigma is the dog's head - nice enough for a pat or two

Nikon is the dog's danglies

Nuff said

DD

 

[Dangleman]

Sigma is the dog's head - nice enough for a pat or two

Nikon is the dog's danglies

Nuff said

DD

Ace

You have made me chuckle. I think I'm going to do it. Watch the for sale boards for a sigma anytime soon...

 

[whitey]

Sigma is the dog's head - nice enough for a pat or two

Nikon is the dog's danglies

Nuff said

DD

I do hope you have stopping patting then

 

[NorthernNikon]

I've got the Nikon 14-24, 28-70 and it seems wrong not to complete the circle

Well to be really picky, it's a triangle and you really should be upgrading the 28-70 to the 24-70 for the really holy trinity.

 

[rdh]

70-200 is a fantastic lens, so sharp! Makes a great portrait lens at 105 and 135 focal lengths too

Only negative is the minimal focus distance, but that's acceptable for a telephoto lens.

 

[Dangleman]

Well, I tried to buy this lens last night, and to cut a log story short and to save my blood pressure, my bank account was 'frauded' yesterday (only a one off smallish infringement that has happened before), and as a result my card was declined and I couldn't buy the lens. I've now had to cancel my card, contact my bank's fraud department, and all that jazz.

Fuggin hell. Is this a sign from the god of spurious lens purchase (bearing in mind the thread title). Is someone trying to tell me I shouldn't buy it, as I was in some doubt? Arrrrg.

 

[joxby]

I know this feeling, its usually when I've bid miles more than top money on a fleabay lucky dip, and still lost..
The rational is that once its bought there's no going back, but if it didn't happen its kinda tinged with relief knowing that any expense/do I need it/what will accounts say, issues, won't have to be dealt with..

 

[Naboo32]

Well, I tried to buy this lens last night, and to cut a log story short and to save my blood pressure, my bank account was 'frauded' yesterday (only a one off smallish infringement that has happened before), and as a result my card was declined and I couldn't buy the lens. I've now had to cancel my card, contact my bank's fraud department, and all that jazz.

Fuggin hell. Is this a sign from the god of spurious lens purchase (bearing in mind the thread title). Is someone trying to tell me I shouldn't buy it, as I was in some doubt? Arrrrg.

No :nono:, it's God's way of telling you to buy it .

The less credit actually left on your card, the less the fraudsters can steal !

 

[kevshore]

You need to get that account emptied pretty quickly! Get the 70-200mm AND the 24-70mm. That way you get a result. You've got what you SHOULD have and you've beaten the fraudsters.

Kev.








Until you realise you need the 300mm 2.8

 

[Dangleman]

Well, I've got my card/ account sorted out - back in the game!

Problem is I'm dithering even more than before now, as I've had a few days to ponder more.

What to do...

I'm just not sure I can justify the cost at this moment and is it really £1000 better than my current Sigma. The recent price hikes across all gear is annoying me too.

Also, what resonable offers would I get for my Sigma 70-200 2.8 (non macro version)?