Ah yes, that is one key detail I forgot to add, the 80-200 does not have VR. It weighs a tad less than the Sig' so it is fairly hefty (all metal construct) for handheld at the longer end.
I own the Nikon lens,, yup,, a Tank !!! I have taken sharp pictures form 80-200,,,, np ultra sharp, Never had any issues with lack of VR,,
let me find a shot...
View attachment 24878
Of course this is reduced to 340K,, but a fun shot...
I am sure the Sigma is a nice lens, will it be built like the Tank that the 80-200 is, I doupt it,, The 80-200 is of the dying breed of lens carved from blocks of steel, and pure glass,,,
instead of plastic, plastic gears, flimsy motors, glued together glass, etc,
Also, the Sigma looks like a tank,, and at 6lbs,, ask yourself how much hand holding are you going to do, I suspect that a Monopod is a must! and even a tripod which you will turn off the VR then. Looks like a solid package, feeback says watch out for Quality control, some have to send back,, but that is typical for Sigma,, and lately more and more for Nikon,, guess its the modern trend.
can you check them out in person? the sigma is a newer design,,,
lately,, I have been using the 80-400 I found instead of the 80x200 2.8,,, not as fast, but lighter, and with the kirk handle/tripod support, really hand carry friendly. Is it as sharp as the
80-200,, no,, but sure does nice shots.
for the lens left on my list,, I am going to rent first, before buying,,,, I really want a to try in the field before spending 1400 dollars... course,, this is kinda dumb... I mean,, the high end lens hold their value so well, that you can just turn around and sell a high end lens, if you really don't take any risk.. . but I suspect the Nikkor high end lens will hold a value longer than a Sigma.
I gambled and went with the Sig'.. Comes in on the 5th (today).. We will see how it goes.