Which long zoom to upgrade my sigma?

badboy1984

badboy1984

Messages
2,529
Edit My Images
No
I'm deciding is time to upgrade my Sigma 70-200 f2.8 HSM MKII (non OS). Its been great but i decided i wanted Nikon glass.

After looking at mpb i filter down the 2 which is within my budget. Anything near £1k is really out of my range atm ........ money is tight.

This Nikon 70-200 f2.8 VR 1 (not mint condition)
http://www.mpbphotographic.co.uk/used-equipment/used-lenses/nikon-af-s-70-200mm-f/2.8g-if-ed-vr/

and this Nikon 80-200 f2.8 AF-D (Altho it look like the AF-S version to my eyes)
http://www.mpbphotographic.co.uk/us...kon-fit-lenses/nikon-af-s-80-200mm-f/2.8d-ed/
 
It is the AF-S version. Really comes down to whether you want VR or not imo. In terms of IQ and AF performance there is nowt to choose between them. The 80-200 can struggle a little with contra light (but many lenses do). A friend of mine had one and reckoned it was sharper than the 70-200 VR but as they are both extremely good I can't see as how it matters. So, VR or not?
 
In terms of optic both is better then my Sigma. I'm still really struggling to decide whether i want VR or not, is something good to have but i never own a VR lens and i'm doing ok atm .......

The 70-200 is in battered condition so i'm not too sure .......

I've ask mpb about the 80-200 and no reply yet, it says is the 1 touch D version but i'm it surely look like AF-S version like you said.
 
badboy1984 said:
In terms of optic both is better then my Sigma. I'm still really struggling to decide whether i want VR or not, is something good to have but i never own a VR lens and i'm doing ok atm .......

The 70-200 is in battered condition so i'm not too sure .......

I've ask mpb about the 80-200 and no reply yet, it says is the 1 touch D version but i'm it surely look like AF-S version like you said.
Click to expand...

There is a 70-200 in the classifieds here going for £725 (not sure if it's gone yet?), which looks in better condition than the MPB one :thumbs:

How about going for the Sigma 70-200 OS which gets much better reviews than the non OS for about £820? It is generally regarded as up there with the Nikon 70-200 VR1
 
badboy1984 said:
In terms of optic both is better then my Sigma. I'm still really struggling to decide whether i want VR or not, is something good to have but i never own a VR lens and i'm doing ok atm .......

The 70-200 is in battered condition so i'm not too sure .......

I've ask mpb about the 80-200 and no reply yet, it says is the 1 touch D version but i'm it surely look like AF-S version like you said.
Click to expand...

They have been known to get their pictures wrong in the past... I pulled them up on a picture v description before and they said it was the wrong pic, right description :thumbs:
 
You are right the one in the classifield is much better. I'm having a long fight to choose which one to buy atm.

I'm not disrespect Sigma because i use them myself but is something about Nikon that want me to buy their lens instead. If i buy the OS version now i will go back to buy the Nikon at some point .....
 
Thats what they reply me:

"Thanks for your email. I have taken a look at this lens for you and can confirm that it is an older version of the lens but is AF-S nonetheless. Please do let me know if you have any further queries at all."

So i take it is a AF-S version. I don't remember their is a older version? Isn't the newer one is the VR 1 and 2 .....
 
badboy1984 said:
Thats what they reply me:

"Thanks for your email. I have taken a look at this lens for you and can confirm that it is an older version of the lens but is AF-S nonetheless. Please do let me know if you have any further queries at all."

So i take it is a AF-S version. I don't remember their is a older version? Isn't the newer one is the VR 1 and 2 .....
Click to expand...

I'd say it's overpriced at £699 anyway... might as well spend the extra and go 70-200 VR1 for that money IMO
 
Is ok man, i'm going to buy the 70-200 f2.8 VR1 in the classifield section. a mint 70-200 instead. Going to sell my sigma to cash some money back lol.
 
simonblue said:
Good choice mine is far from mint con,it had had some heavy use when i brought it s/h but worked like a dream and the p/q was so sharp :)
Click to expand...

I think I'd get killed for spending £800+ on a lens for a hobby, but I'd love to see how much better they are than soimething like my £300 Tamron 70-300 VC?

Fancy a second hand Sigma 70-200 OS if I could get it cheap enough!
 
If it is the 80-200 AF-S and the condition is as described then I would say that is a good price - there aren't too many of them about and I've seen worse at higher prices ... I would say the 80-200 is a good buy.
 
bazfoster said:
I think I'd get killed for spending £800+ on a lens for a hobby, but I'd love to see how much better they are than soimething like my £300 Tamron 70-300 VC?

Fancy a second hand Sigma 70-200 OS if I could get it cheap enough!
Click to expand...

I did have an Sigma one once but unfortunately,the coating on the glass inside the lens went something some Sigma 70-200 were prone to,a £200 repair bill :eek:
 
simonblue said:
I did have an Sigma one once but unfortunately,the coating on the glass inside the lens went something some Sigma 70-200 were prone to,a £200 repair bill :eek:
Click to expand...

Was that on the newer Sigma OS version Simon (Costs around £850 new)? I've never heard anyone mention any problems with the newer one, and even the Non OS Sigma, I've only heard people mention having a soft copy as a potential issue really.
 
Hi it was the older version, just befofe the OS one's I brought it s/h I think this problem was only on this model that it was happening to , and didnt effect all of them just luck of the draw :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top