Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF VS Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM
- Thread starter Sandpoint
- Start date
I've never used the Nikon you mention, but I do own the sigma and think the image quality is superb. Does the Nikon have VR? Shooting handheld at 200mm might be a struggle without it. The Sigma stabilisation is great.
My only complaint is I think it average in low light. Not bad, but definitely not as good as the Nikon 70-200... but at half the price (in Australia anyways) understandable.
My only complaint is I think it average in low light. Not bad, but definitely not as good as the Nikon 70-200... but at half the price (in Australia anyways) understandable.
Last edited:
At 200mm, with no VR, you'd better have a really steady hand. (or a tripod)
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...
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.
let me find a shot...
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.
Last edited:
Being built like a tank is definitely one of the reasons why I'm eyeing the Nikon heavily, (That and it holds its value very well). I love the quality of the older lenses.. I've not seen many reviews/writings about the 80-200 that were negative, it seems to be a really solid performer. Indeed I would have my monopod with me most days or even my tripod so I don't see having to use them at times as a negative for either lens.. I just want to make sure I pull the trigger on the right glass. I like them both, each have their pros/cons, obviously offer the range I'm interested in, and aren't too far apart in price ATM...
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.
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.
Very Nice. Hand held or supported?
I am not able to check them out in person at this time. I thought of buying the Nikkor, and then renting the Sig' down the road (chance of getting a bunk one though), and then pitting them against each other in some tests. If I preferred the Siggy, I could always just sell the Nikon, purchase the Sig' and go from there. If the Siggy I bought didn't live up, I could turn around and sell that, and pick up the Nikkor again (chances of getting another good Nikkor variant are pretty high with their older builds)... So far though I am leaning heavily toward the Nikkor 80-200 two ring. It seems to be a fairly proven lens, and VR/OS isn't too much of a concern with me at the time. I don't mind using the support if it's needed really. Guess we will see how it goes...
Tripod under it...Saturday & Sunday, the days started about 9 am and finished around 4.30 pm..
Three of us taking the shots and a book keeper...
Here's another...
Belo
Senior Member
Please let us know. I am in a similar predicament and cant make up my mind.
So far I am liking the lens. I haven't been able to fully test it out, but for kicks I compared a shot at 70mm to my Nikkor 24-70, same settings (both at 70mm), and they look identical straight out of cam except the 24-70 had EVER SO SLIGHTLY more contrast. Sharpness and color rendition looked surprisingly identical. The OS seems to work nicely, and will be needed due to the weight of the lens. It isn't that bad, but will be noticeable after some time shooting hand held. The build quality is fairly decent, though a shame it wasn't weather sealed. Overall though (so far) it seems to be a great lens.
Also worth a small note: I'd been reading everywhere (including some reviews) that this lens came with the ugly older gritty finish on the Zoom/Focus rings, and the tripod ring. Not so with the one I received. The tripod ring is a matte black rubberized finish, while the rings look about like the Nikkor rings. Overall the finish looks sharp and matches my Nikkor glass. All of this is just cosmetic of course, just found it interesting.