Sigma 70-300 or Nikon DX 55-200

I have the Sigma lens and whilst a total beginner am getting mixed results which I put down to not holding the camera steady enough and I assume a tripod would help. The Nikon has VR and I would ask the experts if I would benefit from this or just persevere with the Sigma?

Edit I would assume the auto focus would be of good assistance?

My D3200 came with the 55-200 and I have to say that it’s a pretty good lens and yes, the VR does help…but don’t expect perfection (pictures can/will still come out blurry).* I took some pretty decent pics of a show (darker lighting) and a parade (outdoor, indirect sunlight) at Disneyland where I tried out different settings with that lens.* I wish that I could tell you definitively that the VR makes a big difference but I can’t because I only shoot with the VR on (no non-VR pics to compare against).* However, I can’t see how the VR wouldn’t help.

*

I also have the 55-300 and I have to tell you that even with the VR I do get very mixed results (even with a tripod).* The 300 is pretty good in direct sunlight on a clear day without a tripod (I set the camera on my bent knee for support while sitting on a chaise lounge)—but not magazine quality for sure.* In an opposite situation, I had a difficult time taking pics of my 5 y/o daughter in a gym during her basketball class even with VR and a tripod because there just wasn’t enough light and the lens doesn’t seem to be fast enough (but I’m only a beginner so it could be that I suck). But in either case, I’m pretty sure that it must be difficult shooting with a 300 mm zoom in those conditions without a tripod or VR. *What situations are you shooting in?

*

Yes, autofocus helps a LOT but I was surprised to see that the AF can stutter in mediocre light (the gym situation for me).* The 300 struggled to focus when the aperture was small in the gym—even when the ISO was set to 6400.* I can’t remember exactly but I don’t think I was able to go above 10 without the AF going nuts.

*

There’s a pretty significant difference in reach between the 55-200 and 55-300 so be prepared if you go to the 200 because you might be disappointed to see how much zoom you lose.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 4

I forgot to mention that I shoot in manual only.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 4

Thanks for the quick and informative posting. I had an option on the DX at £90 but will try a bit harder with the Sigma which does not have VR and see how I get on.

Leaving this Friday, with Motorhome, to travel right down UK, through France and into Spain for about 3 months. Most of the shots will be landscape and whatever comes along.

​Again thanks for info.

eidian said:

* In an opposite situation, I had a difficult time taking pics of my 5 y/o daughter in a gym during her basketball class even with VR and a tripod because there just wasn’t enough light and the lens doesn’t seem to be fast enough (but I’m only a beginner so it could be that I suck).

Click to expand...

I've always been told to NEVER use the VR when you're on a tripod as this can actually make the shot blurry. Vibration Reduction (VR) does just that by vibrating against your movements when hand held. This helps to minimise any movement.

​If you have it switched on when you're on a tripod, it will try to reduce blurriness by vibrating. This will, of course, cause blurriness in your tripod photos. Cheers, Brad

shortcircuit said:

I have the Sigma lens and whilst a total beginner am getting mixed results which I put down to not holding the camera steady enough and I assume a tripod would help. The Nikon has VR and I would ask the experts if I would benefit from this or just persevere with the Sigma?

Edit I would assume the auto focus would be of good assistance?

Click to expand...

Have you tried adjusting the Exposure Compensation in 'Aperture Priority' mode for a little more light and speed? Cheers, Brad

Lost my first attempt so this may be an echo. Thanks for the tip Brad. As I said I am a complete novice so will give it a try and see what happens. My thoughts were that the Nikon lens is more automatic than the Sigma with auto-focus etc and may have helped me get more consistent results. It may well be that what I need is practice and more practice, however thanks again.

shortcircuit said:

Lost my first attempt so this may be an echo. Thanks for the tip Brad. As I said I am a complete novice so will give it a try and see what happens. My thoughts were that the Nikon lens is more automatic than the Sigma with auto-focus etc and may have helped me get more consistent results. It may well be that what I need is practice and more practice, however thanks again.

Click to expand...

Don't worry, I still call myself a complete novice too. I can take a hundred photos of the one subject and still only find one, maybe two that I'm happy with. They ALL need work however. Keep going, you'll have great fun. Cheers, Brad
​

Turbary Wood Owl Sanctury - a set on Flickr
Nikon 55-300 all hand held, it is one of my favourite lenses for my D3200, but you do need to use a correct shutter speed, and even with VR it will vary from person to person and quite often from one session to another. But without VR on a telephoto lens I need bright sunshine and a lot of luck, with VR I can easily get 2 stops advantage and sometimes 3 (based on reciprocal of the lens length (ie 300mm 1/300sec, though with crop factor I believe 1/450 is better) so using 300mm I can shoot at 1/100s on a good day...
I don't think its the lens in my case its user mistakes, not noting shutter speed, altering ISO or on one occasion forgot to turn the VR on, 50 shots assigned to the bin