Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Geoffc" data-source="post: 350120" data-attributes="member: 8705">Re: I'm almost sure, but I'm skeptical about the 70-200mmThese threads about the Nikon 70-200 VRII always make me chuckle. The nay sayers always suggest something else wins in the sharpness tests blah blah blah. The funny thing is they are often the ones who don't have one. All I can say is this. I own one and if you can see a sharpness improvement in some other 70-200 you're a better man than I and you must enjoy viewing pixels. I'm not saying it's sharper than others as I haven't tried them, but I know what sharp is and this is a benchmark. It also focuses very quickly and can be used to hammer nails in as a result of the metal body. Finally, I could sell my two year old lens for a few hundred pounds less then I bought it for, so all in all I'm a happy chap.I made the mistake of lending my 70-200 to my sceptical wife who couldn't  see why it would be so much better than her 18-200. We now have one each!!On the 17-50 side of things I can confirm that the Sigma is excellent in terms of image quality. It does cause the preview scroll to step rather than scroll which is irritating but the image quality more than makes up for it. Also, the manual focus ring turns as you autofocus. However, considering the cost and performance we are happy with it.Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD</blockquote>