Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Sigma or Nikon

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

Leave a Comment
    • «
    • 1
    • »
    13 Feb 2008 - 12:48 AM

    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

    Sponsored Links
    Sponsored Links 
    13 Feb 2008 - 12:48 AM

    Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

    uggyy  82104 forum posts Scotland9 Constructive Critique Points
    13 Feb 2008 - 2:39 AM

    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

    13 Feb 2008 - 2:53 AM

    thanks Tommy

    13 Feb 2008 - 9:04 AM

    A mate has just got the new sigma 70-200mm 2.8 MkII, it's a great piece of kit for the money.


    pepperst  72328 forum posts Wales4 Constructive Critique Points
    13 Feb 2008 - 9:11 AM

    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.


    Geraint  8715 forum posts Wales34 Constructive Critique Points
    13 Feb 2008 - 9:21 AM

    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,

    nickfrog  7333 forum posts
    13 Feb 2008 - 11:17 PM

    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  82104 forum posts Scotland9 Constructive Critique Points
    14 Feb 2008 - 1:13 AM

    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

    14 Feb 2008 - 2:39 AM

    Thanks guys the Sigmas sounding good

    TPPhoto  833 forum posts United Kingdom
    15 Feb 2008 - 5:56 PM

    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

    • «
    • 1
    • »

    Add a Comment

    You must be a member to leave a comment

    Remember me:
    Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.