Sell my 70-300VR for a Sigma 70-200 2.8?

[viper_biker]

In a bit of a dilema here. I have a seriously unused 70-300VR and I'm thinking of getting another 2.8 lens. I shoot mostly motorsport and my 300/4 stays on the camera practically all the time. I did buy a Tamron 70-200 2.8 and kept it for only a short time as it wasn't quick enough for motorsport (then I bought the 300/4) although the images were superb.

Comparing the Nikon and the Sigma, I believe that the Sigma is a quick piece of glass and that the IQ is really good too. The reason for the swap is for the 2.8. Theextra stop capability of the 2.8 will practically equal the VR and I do enjoy taking photos of my niece and nephew and also of relatives at family occasion etc. Wise move or just a side-step. I'll still have the reach of the 300 in the 300/4 and the flexability of a 70-200.

 

[stu_the_flat]

Well I ended up buying a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 and I never want to take it off my camera. if your being really fussy you can see a tiny bit of Chromatic aberration in the reds at 200mm but its only noticeable if I you look for it.

I've never used a 70-300 so I can't comment. but the Sigma is so good I don't want one!

 

[Dangermouse]

Hi Gareth mate I personally loved the Tamron but as you say a tad too slow but the sharpness....superb however the Sigma is fast I had one from whitey but for aircraft in blue sky it just didnt seem ultra sharp but for other stuff it did seem excellent I think your move is a good one and not a sidestep and the extra stops will give you a range suited for portraits but you will lose the VR whic I never cared for any how but hope you find one mate

 

[viper_biker]

The Tamron certainly was sharp but outclassed by the speed of the 70-300. I think I have made my decision really, but would like to see what people have to say about both (especially if the own/owned both).