Lens Lust: bit the bullet last night

[ftslogger]

I have been eye-balling a f/2.8 zoom. I had my mind set on a Nikon 80-200 AF-S, but used from KEH they were around $889.00 (BGN), and I checked with my local Wolf Camera frown and they had a NEW Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 EX HSM lens. That lens is built like a tank, and seems to be nearly silent when focusing, and quite fast. I purchased it, but haven't had much time to play with it to see if it is going to stay in my bag - or if I am going to get the Nikon AF-S (used).

Anyone have any experience with both lenses? I hope I made the right decision - New Lens with warranty - vs. used discontinued lens with no warranty.

 

[MParker]

I've used both and the AF-S 70-200/2.8 VR. The Sigma is as good as either in every important way. My experience is that HSM on that lens is faster than AF-S, a feature that might be important in some circumstances. A good choice. I used one for a long time but found myself using the extreme ends so I now shoot mostly primes but I do miss it sometimes.

 

[Michael Lyons]

I love my Sigma 70-200, it works great but soon will be replaced with a Nikon 70-200 VR

 

[cadman]

OK, so here's my opinion after 2 vodka tonics and 2 shared bottles of wine while watching the final episode of "lost" (Tivo of course):

When you get to f2.8 and you have vr or is or whatever, it comes down to this:

Feel and confidence:

The 70-200 vr feels so good. Great balance, smooth focus and zoom, confidence inspiring IQ. It's a zen kinda thing and that gentlemen is why we are nikon peeps and not canon.

I love the feel, I love the results. I will always be a Nikon guy just like I will always be a Porsche guy. BMW (Canon) can sell all the cars (cameras) in the world and they will never satisfy like a Porsche (Nikon).

It's all in what appeals to your senses. It ain't rocket science, it's better, it's art.