1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

Need some input please

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by Micah, Jun 16, 2005.

  1. Micah


    May 8, 2005
    I'm looking at the latest version of Sigma's 70-200 and comparing it to the Nikon VR. Although I would love to have the Nikon, my budget is screaming at the thought of a new lens anyway. How well does the Sigma work with a D2H (recently purchased too)?

    Ya know, I just gotta keep up with Gale :D 

  2. jfrancis


    May 8, 2005
    Orlando, FL
    If there is any way your budget could stretch, get the Nikkor. It is fabulous lens and your images will thank you for it.
  3. Gale


    Jan 26, 2005
    Viera Fl
    LOLOLOL Mary,

    I think the consensus will be no comparason..

    70-200 VR will out shine most lenses.

    Yeah I hocked my soul to the devil..

    Should have done it along time ago.
  4. Micah


    May 8, 2005
    How did I know y'all were going to say that! Geez, what do I have that I can sell? hmmmmm
  5. eng45ine


    May 11, 2005
    Chicago, IL
    Hey Mary,

    I have to chime in to echo what the others have recommended. I have no real experience with Sigma, Tokina, etc., but if you can find a way to purchase Nikkor glass...do it. You may have to scrimp here and there or wait a bit longer for the purchase, but I doubt that you will regret the decision. It would be nice if you could try the Sigma out before you made your final decision.
  6. I faced the same decision last year, Mary. The 70-200VR was already legendary, but it was out of my hobbyist budget range, so that left me with two ways to go:

    1. a third party lens, like the Sigma 70-200, or
    2. an earlier generation of the Nikon midrange telephoto

    After reading tons of reviews and looking at pictures until my eyes bled, I opted for the Nikon 80-200/2.8D ED two ring version. It's not as fast focusing as the Sigma, but it has virtually the same optical quality of the 70-200, and in most cases, I've been able to substitute technique for technology. I use a monopod, which is a pretty effective "poor man's VR".

    The only area where the AF speed has been a drawback is in birding, but to be frank, 200mm is too short for avian work anyway.... even with a 1.4X teleconverter. If I decide to go further, I'll pick up the 300mm f/4 AFS. Note: the 80-200 would focus faster on your d2h than it does on my d70.

    It's been a year now, and I still feel like I made the right decision. I have great Nikon optics, and a lens that will hold its resale value better than a 3rd party lens.
  7. Brew

    Brew Guest

    I had the Sigma 70-200 HSM and although a very nice lens I sold my soul to the Devil (and the lens too) and picked up the VR. I am shooting a lot of my son's baseball and basketball games. I put a 1.7 converter on the VR and outside I am still able to hand hold it. The Sigma is nice but the VR is in a league of its own.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.