ClubSNAP Photography Forums

Go Back   ClubSNAP Photography Forums > General Discussions > General, Reviews, Tech Talk

General, Reviews, Tech Talk Share tips & tricks, techniques, general photography chat.


 
Thread Tools
Old 13th September 2007   #1
theislandofdreams
New Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21
Default 70-200 VR or 70-200 Macro

I was thinking of getting one of those 70-200 2.8 lenses (Nikon) and now deciding between Nikon's VR and Sigma's Macro

Nikon's VR more expensive, but it's got VR...
Sigma's Macro seems like an interesting idea, especially when coupled with a teleconverter...

so my question is to those who use either, is the VR that useful? and is the Macro any good?

i'm thinking if i shoot any form of sports i'm going to need a high shutter speed, and i don't see myself shooting anything particularly slow at such a zoom. and i can see myself at least starting to try macro photography
theislandofdreams is offline  
Old 13th September 2007   #2
giantcanopy
Member
 
giantcanopy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Northerner
Posts: 3,966
Default Re: 70-200 VR or 70-200 Macro

VR useful ? Yes especially at the more telephoto end or in dimmer lightings

Never used the 70-200 macro but i would rather get a dedicated macro lens such as the Nikon 105 or the Tamron 90

* BTW if you really want to have one lens do it all, the Nikon 70-200mm VR becomes a decent macro when u slap a say Canon 500D close up filter

Ryan
__________________
Kaleidoscopy & Singapore Shave!
Shaving Jedi
giantcanopy is offline  
Old 13th September 2007   #3
advrider
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: LA 2019
Posts: 1,292
Default Re: 70-200 VR or 70-200 Macro

getting a cheapo monopod will give you the same result as a VR. so get the macro.
advrider is offline  
Old 13th September 2007   #4
westwest2
Account Suspended
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 539
Default Re: 70-200 VR or 70-200 Macro

Originally Posted by advrider View Post
getting a cheapo monopod will give you the same result as a VR. so get the macro.
but one cannot carry a monopod all the time right...a true macro lens is prefered
westwest2 is offline  
Old 13th September 2007   #5
zac08
Senior Member
 
zac08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: East
Posts: 10,962
Default Re: 70-200 VR or 70-200 Macro

Originally Posted by theislandofdreams View Post
I was thinking of getting one of those 70-200 2.8 lenses (Nikon) and now deciding between Nikon's VR and Sigma's Macro

Nikon's VR more expensive, but it's got VR...
Sigma's Macro seems like an interesting idea, especially when coupled with a teleconverter...

so my question is to those who use either, is the VR that useful? and is the Macro any good?

i'm thinking if i shoot any form of sports i'm going to need a high shutter speed, and i don't see myself shooting anything particularly slow at such a zoom. and i can see myself at least starting to try macro photography
The VR is good if you need to handhold. And there's a price difference to these 2 lenses, choose one that you'll need carefully. The Sigma's macro is not a true macro, i.e. the reproduction ratio is not 1:1, it about 1:3.5

With a 2x TC, you get a 140-400mm, but you dun get any enlargement in reproduction ratio or any reduction in focusing distance. You may need a close-up filter or an extension tube to achieve this rather.

Do think about these points and check out more on the pictures from these 2 lenses before you get it.
__________________
Michael Lim
My Flickr Site APAD 2009
zac08 is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +8. The time now is 11:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2002 - 2009 ClubSNAP.com
Page generated in 0.06809 seconds with 7 queries