Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


PRIZES GALORE! Enter The ePHOTOzine Exclusive Christmas Prize Draw; Over £10,000 Worth of Prizes! Plus A Gift For Everybody On Christmas Day!

Sigma or Nikon


Steinmachine 11 76 Scotland
13 Feb 2008 12:48AM
Managed to get some money together for a new lens.Its going to be the Nikon 80-200 F2.8 or the Sigma 70-200 F2.8 any of you guys had any experience with any of these lenses.
Thanks in advance
Derek

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

uggyy 9 2.1k 9 Scotland
13 Feb 2008 2:39AM
I have the Sigma 70-200 F2.8.

My two recent shots are with it, bird ones. I also used it a lot for American Football and found it to be a good solid performer for the price.

The Nikons a nice bit of kit too. I dont think you would go wrong with either. Though if buying 2nd hand watch for some of the older sigmas having some problems with the D200 and needed re-chipped.

All the Best, Tommy
Steinmachine 11 76 Scotland
13 Feb 2008 2:53AM
thanks Tommy
jaspernina 7 1.0k Wales
13 Feb 2008 9:04AM
A mate has just got the new sigma 70-200mm 2.8 MkII, it's a great piece of kit for the money.

Stephen
pepperst 7 2.3k 4 Wales
13 Feb 2008 9:11AM
I asked the same sortof question a while back on a lower budget and was told by quite a few to save up for the sigma (inc Tommy above). Still saving though.

I know someone else who has it and loves it, and I got the 17-70 recently and its a gem.

Although for that money I doubt you'll be disapointed with either choice.

Peps
Geraint 8 715 34 Wales
13 Feb 2008 9:21AM
I also own the Sigma (the macro version) and I’m very happy with it. It took me a while to get the best out of it, but that was down to user error rather than problems with the lens. One tip: in low light I only use the 2.8 when absolutely necessary; I try my best never to go below f/4 – the number of sharp shots increases dramatically if you do this. Using the lens at f/6.3 or higher yields excellent results, if you can get a shutter speed high enough to accommodate it. If I could’ve afforded it I would have gone for the Canon equivalent, but at double the price it wasn’t an option unfortunately! I’m not trying to plug my pf, but the series “Children of Vietnam” was taken using this lens, normally at the 200mm end of the lens. If the images look a bit noisy it was because of the rather high ISO (400-800), which the 350d doesn’t handle brilliantly unfortunately, and not because of defects in the lens. Hope this helps,
Geraint
nickfrog 7 333
13 Feb 2008 11:17PM
Great lens but MANY of them seem to have serious front focus out of the box. Sigma UK seem good at sorting things out though.
uggyy 9 2.1k 9 Scotland
14 Feb 2008 1:13AM
I was lucky, I picked up my Sigma 70-200 F2.8 2nd hand for a decent price and it was hardly used.

Its served me well. Taken pictures in all weather and taken a few knocks (American Football is hard on TOGs) and lived to tell the tale.

Dont get me wrong though, I would love the Nikon 70-200 F2.8 VR but right now its not on the priority listing.. Food is lol
Steinmachine 11 76 Scotland
14 Feb 2008 2:39AM
Thanks guys the Sigmas sounding good
TPPhoto 8 33 United Kingdom
15 Feb 2008 5:56PM
The Sigma is a great lens for its price, i use it for grass roots level motorsport and i haven't been let down yet. You would be hard pushed to notice any difference to the nikon on the final image

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.