Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM

TPFoster

TPFoster

Messages
87
Name
Tom
Edit My Images
No
Does anyone have this lens? What are your thoughts? Are you using it on FX/DX? How effective is the OS on this lens?
I've already read a few reviews but wanted some more personal input and couldn't find an existing thread for this lens!

Thanks for any opinions!
Tom
 
TPFoster said:
Does anyone have this lens? What are your thoughts? Are you using it on FX/DX? How effective is the OS on this lens?
I've already read a few reviews but wanted some more personal input and couldn't find an existing thread for this lens!

Thanks for any opinions!
Tom
Click to expand...

I used to have a Nikon fit version. It's a good lens although getting a good one appears to be a bit of an issue. I used it on FX and DX and got some decent results. If you are going to get one make sure you give it a good testing as there seems to be over the average amount of bad copies around with a lot of people having issues with sharpness at f/2.8. Everyone I know that has had one says it is razor sharp at f/4 but you buy these lenses really to use at f/2.8.

The copy I had was sharp at f/2.8 but a friend lent me his Nikon VR2 for a week and I just had to have one. :D I found the Nikon to be a lot quicker to a.f especially in poor light. As for the O.S I personally had some issues with mine although I have not heard of many others saying the same so it could be that there was an issue with my copy.

If you want a lens in this range that won't break the bank these are very good value for money. That said however, I am sorry I just didn't hang of until I had the cash and get the VR2 at the time because I am absolutely delighted with it. It cost me an extra £700 to upgrade to the VR2 and I have never regretted it.

Used Nikon VR1's pop up on the classifieds here all the time at decent money as another option.
 
Last edited:
I own this lens and have had it on both the D700 and the D800. I can't fault it apart from being heavy and bulky.

The OS is very effective. If I thought the lens wasn't up to scratch it would be gone. In fact I considered upgrading to the VR2 nikon but an extra £900 if you ask me is insanity. It's nice and sharp at 2.8 and razor sharp by f/4. Provided you get a good copy you won't get anything better this side of a VR2.

You can pick up grey imports for around £700. You cannot get a better lens for anywhere near that sort of money.
 
Last edited:
Soda Farl said:
I used to have a Nikon fit version. It's a good lens although getting a good one appears to be a bit of an issue. I used it on FX and DX and got some decent results. If you are going to get one make sure you give it a good testing as there seems to be over the average amount of bad copies around with a lot of people having issues with sharpness at f/2.8. Everyone I know that has had one says it is razor sharp at f/4 but you buy these lenses really to use at f/2.8.

The copy I had was sharp at f/2.8 but a friend lent me his Nikon VR2 for a week and I just had to have one. :D I found the Nikon to be a lot quicker to a.f especially in poor light. As for the O.S I personally had some issues with mine although I have not heard of many others saying the same so it could be that there was an issue with my copy.

If you want a lens in this range that won't break the bank these are very good value for money. That said however, I am sorry I just didn't hang of until I had the cash and get the VR2 at the time because I am absolutely delighted with it. It cost me an extra £700 to upgrade to the VR2 and I have never regretted it.

Used Nikon VR1's pop up on the classifieds here all the time at decent money as another option.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the input, I appreciate the Nikon VRII should be better but it is obviously significantly more, I've been watching a few on Ebay over the past couple of months (and actually just missed out on getting one for £710- was out at the time and my mobile signal betrayed me!)! I'm not a professional photographer at the moment so can't justify buying a Nikon one new. I wouldn't mind using it at f/4 necessarily if the OS was good- I know that 4 stops is often claimed and that should be enough to counteract any potential f/2.8 softness (and the 2.8 is always there if needed). Thanks though, you've given me some food for thought. I'll surely be checking out the classified section too! Edit: When I'm allowed in!

TonyNI said:
I own this lens and have had it on both the D700 and the D800. I can't fault it apart from being heavy and bulky.

The OS is very effective. If I thought the lens wasn't up to scratch it would be gone. In fact I considered upgrading to the VR2 nikon but an extra £900 if you ask me is insanity. It's nice and sharp at 2.8 and razor sharp by f/4. Provided you get a good copy you won't get anything better this side of a VR2.

You can pick up grey imports for around £700. You cannot get a better lens for anywhere near that sort of money.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you have a nice copy! I understand that it's a large lens and heavy but I can cope with that (and besides, any 70-200 will have this problem!), I'm glad to hear that you like it though. I am going to Iceland in the Autumn for 2 months and was wanting a 70-200 for then, i.e. there's no immediate rush; I guess I have a few months to make up my mind (or more likely impulse buy one evening)!

I saw Digital Rev has them for just over £700, I know that's imported though...
 
Last edited:
I pretty much exclusively used this lens for every portrait. I just got myself a 85 1.4 and it has completely blown me away so I may switch to using that for my portraits as the look it gives is very unique.

You won't be disappointed with the 70-200 OS, go for it
 
I hired a nikkor 70-200 VR2 from Lensesforhire for a week.

I then bought the Sigma AF 70-200 f2,8 EX DG OS HSM which I have been really pleased with. I use it on a D90 and only rarely use it at f2.8.

It is heavy but you soon get used to it!

I chose to pay a bit more for a UK one as it has a 3yr extended warranty with Sigma UK.


Heather
 
Last edited:
I don't think there's an issue with 'bad copies' any more than any other lens TBH, most of it is scaremongering.

I have the non OS (I know its different!) and its superb in every way. I used it against the Canon variant and I couldn't tell the difference in IQ, the Canon certainly wasn't worth twice the price!
 
Its a great lens, had a couple already in different mounts, all sharp at F2.8 and no focus issues, unlike the previous non OS models I had which can be very hit & miss. I was lucky enough to own the OS and a VR1 to test alongside, the VR1 stabilisation isnt as good but the VR1 IQ is just a little better wide open (contrast, colour and sharpness), the AF is also more accurate with the VR1.

I kept the VR1 as overall image quality and AF was better (except for vignette at FX 200mm which is very easy to fix in LR). Id highly recommend the Sigma OS if you cant stretch as its a lot better than the Tamron and Non OS variants.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the comments, I wouldn't be especially bothered about 'bad copies', I appreciate that happens with every lens. I saw that there is a new Tamron 70-200 (DI VC USD) but it doesn't seem many people have one yet and it doesn't seem very readily available.

Where did you get yours from Heather? The UK ones I've seen are quite a lot more!

Edit: Bit the bullet and ordered. I decided to go with Amazon in the end, was ~£100 more but I would rather have the peace of mind associated with a non grey import lens! Will let you know my thoughts when it arrives!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top