Sigma 70-200 f2.8 Nikon fit, which one?

A

andephotographic

Suspended / Banned
Messages
400
Name
Andrew
Edit My Images
No
Thinking of getting a new tele lens.
Can't really afford Nikon glass just now except maybe an old 80-200mm one touch.
Read lots of stuff about Siggy lenses having focus problems but are they really that bad?
In the past I'v had a Sigma 17-40mm which was alright and a 15mm prime which was stunning so I'm finding it hard to beleive the 70-200mm is so much worse.
If they are that bad, is it every one they've made or are there particular models that are better than others?
Also if anyone has experince of an 80-200 dust pump from the big N, should i just go for that instead?
At the moment I'm using a 70-300mmD f4-5.6 Sigma lens that's just plastic tat really so I suppose anything is going to be an improvement on that.
 
I have a Tamron 70-200mm that I got today, it's really sharp and AF seems spot on, not as fast as the Nikon VRII I played with in Jessops but then I paid £1200 less :shrug:
 
Yeah I had thought about the Tammy, trouble is though, they don't tend to come up used much and new it's the same price as a Nikon 80-200mm 2 touch.
 
Think it goes like this according to info I've picked up:

*Nikon 70-200mm VR (mk1 + mk2) - the best
*Nikon 80-200mm AF-S - as good as the 70-200 but without VR. Like hens teeth
*Nikon 80-200mm AF-D (twist zoom) - slightly slower AF, superb optics, cheap at £650(ish)
*Nikon 80-200mm AF-D (pull/push) - old but good and cheap
*Sigma 70-200mm - sharp as a tack but may have calbration issues. Check in person
*Tamron 70-200mm - slow AF, very crisp optics, seen them for £450 new

I had a Siggy Mk1 but traded for a 80-200 Nikon one-touch (twist). Great lens and the AF is superb on a pro body :)

Could check out www.photozone.de for reviews....
 
Last edited:
specialman said:
I had a Siggy Mk1 but traded for a 80-200 Nikon one-touch (twist). Great lens and the AF is superb on a pro body :)
Click to expand...

That's good to know, it'd be going on a D3 but I was still worried about the AF being pretty slow. Like I say though, it'll be a step up from my plastic Siggy that I'm using just now.
Think if I was buying new I wouldn't mind taking the chance on the Siggy 70-200 but I wanted to save a bit by buying used and I don't fancy having to pay for a recal if it's required.
 
If it's any help, AP tested the new Sig 70-200 OS against the Canon MkII a couple of weeks ago and rated it very highly in comparison.
 
Mifsuds have a used Nikon 80-200 one touch in so I'm seeing if they'll do me a deal with taking some kit off me in part ex/direct swap for it.

Think any kind of stabilised or vr 2.8 lens is out of reach for me just now and even if I could afford £1200 for the new Sigma 70-200 OS I'd rather stretch myself another £3-400 and get the Nikon lens.

It might just be me but the Sigma lens being 3/4 to 4/5 the price of the Nikon just isn't competitive enough for me.

Also noticed there's the Nikon 70-300 4.5-5.6 VR which is almost within my budget new, if I can find a used one then a definite contender.
 
TBH, unless you've used the Nikon 70-200mm, you won't notice the slightly slower AF on the 80-200 AF-D, it's that positive.

70-300 VR is a good lens. Slower apertures yes, but good optics :)
 
I've got the 80-200 one-touch and all things considered it's a great lens.

Thinking of selling it though because in due time I've come to be frustrated at lack of VR (few times I would have liked to use it in low light and couldn't) and because I can't use it with teleconverters, and also it can at times be a bit slow to focus (definitely felt like I was fighting it when shooting some action a few times).

These things ultimately have nothing to do with picture quality (when you actually get a picture!) though so...
 
Well Mifsuds are doing me the deal I wanted on the 80-200 1touch they have for sale so I'lll be sending them my stuff in the morning and hopefully have the lens by middle of next week.

I wasn't convinced the VR of the 70-300 and slower shutter speeds would do me as much good as the faster aperture and consequently faster shutter speeds.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top