Which lens should I buy??

[Triggertrevor]

Hi all just wondered if anybody would like to give me some advise on a few lenes.

camera is a Nikon D3
I currently have a sigma 70-200 and thought about buying the sigma 120-300 last version not the new one.
But then thought would I be better upgrading my current lens to nikons 70-200 vr 1 or vr 2.
Thought the 120-300 would be good to give me the reach back that i had on my D7000 but I do have a 1.4 teleconvertor.

What's everyones thoughts

cheers kev

 

[Uxon]

Completely depends what you're shooting and how much you need/want the extra reach? Also what your total upgrade budget is, I've generally heard good things about the 120-300 from Sigma but sadly can't speak from experience when it comes to that lens.

 

[Triggertrevor]

Completely depends what you're shooting and how much you need/want the extra reach? Also what your total upgrade budget is, I've generally heard good things about the 120-300 from Sigma but sadly can't speak from experience when it comes to that lens.

Sorry forgot that part. I'm shooting sports,football downhill mountain biking and motor cross.

Cheers kev

 

[Porsupah]

I’m not quite sure what to recommend, actually. I’ve certainly enjoyed using the previous version 120-300mm f/2.8 (with OS, but not the 2013 version with a programmable focus limiter), but as I often wind up having to crop down, I wind up feeling the results aren’t up to the level of the Nikkor 300mm f/4. The latter isn’t as bright, and crucially, can’t pull back for a close subject, but is considerably lighter - easily handheld for prolonged periods, rather than forcing reliance on a tripod, or having to rest periodically.

If you don’t feel you’ll need to crop down much, you’d likely do well with the Sigma - it’s decently sharp, but not to the extreme of some other lenses. The stabilisation does work well, though if you’re having to engage that, chances are your particular subjects are moving too quickly for it to be all that useful. I don’t think I’d recommend using the Sigma 2x TC, though I was using it with a D7100, which inherently shows up softness that much more - with a D3, it might be a much better combination.

 

[Triggertrevor]

I’m not quite sure what to recommend, actually. I’ve certainly enjoyed using the previous version 120-300mm f/2.8 (with OS, but not the 2013 version with a programmable focus limiter), but as I often wind up having to crop down, I wind up feeling the results aren’t up to the level of the Nikkor 300mm f/4. The latter isn’t as bright, and crucially, can’t pull back for a close subject, but is considerably lighter - easily handheld for prolonged periods, rather than forcing reliance on a tripod, or having to rest periodically.

If you don’t feel you’ll need to crop down much, you’d likely do well with the Sigma - it’s decently sharp, but not to the extreme of some other lenses. The stabilisation does work well, though if you’re having to engage that, chances are your particular subjects are moving too quickly for it to be all that useful. I don’t think I’d recommend using the Sigma 2x TC, though I was using it with a D7100, which inherently shows up softness that much more - with a D3, it might be a much better combination.

Thanks again for your input, I would be shooting off a monopod so the weight doesn't bother me.
I have been looking at the nikon 300 f4 for a while now but didn't know how it would far in the uk on winter afternoons shooting football with the fading light. ? Might be okay the first half but not sure about the second.
My budget won't stretch to nikons 2 8 lenes.
I bought a 1.4 teleconvetor to try on the sigma 70-200 to give me an idea at f4 what's possible shooting football.

Cheers kev

 

[psenior1]

is it the latest sigma 70-200? I have the Nikon VRII and latest sigma, the Sigma is VERY close to being a match for the Nikon. Personally I'd probably sell the TC you have and pick up a 300 F4 and push the ISO's higher, when the light is really bad then you can always switch to DX mode on the sigma 70-200 ad shoot at 2.8.