Nikon vs Sigma Telephoto Zoom

[mikeng]

I need some bros good advice on the quality of the 70-200 telephoto zoom lens between the Nikon (AF-S VR 70-200mm f/2.8G IF ED) and the Sigma (70-200 f2.8 EX APO IF HSM). I have read good reviews for both (more infact for the Sigma) and due to the big price difference, I would like to know bros who has first hand experience on these lens (not necessary both!).
Thank you in advance and I apologise if this request is a repeated thread.

 

[buddy]

I need some bros good advice on the quality of the 70-200 telephoto zoom lens between the Nikon (AF-S VR 70-200mm f/2.8G IF ED) and the Sigma (70-200 f2.8 EX APO IF HSM). I have read good reviews for both (more infact for the Sigma) and due to the big price difference, I would like to know bros who has first hand experience on these lens (not necessary both!).
Thank you in advance and I apologise if this request is a repeated thread.

go to CP or other shop to test out the lens. thats what happened to me, when i held the sigma, i knew it was not for me. just couldnt get comfortable with the finish and the handling. my 2cts only..

 

[Winston]

I need some bros good advice on the quality of the 70-200 telephoto zoom lens between the Nikon (AF-S VR 70-200mm f/2.8G IF ED) and the Sigma (70-200 f2.8 EX APO IF HSM). I have read good reviews for both (more infact for the Sigma) and due to the big price difference, I would like to know bros who has first hand experience on these lens (not necessary both!).
Thank you in advance and I apologise if this request is a repeated thread.

a few of reasons there are more good reviews for sigma over the AF-S VR is that....

a) been around longer than the Nikon VR (hence more reviews)
b) More affordable hence more people own it and give their comments
c) Price might be one of the review factors and sigma has the edge


The Nikon AF-S VR is really a good lenses and is not really the same "class" or category as the Sigma 70-200mm HSM, hence the diff in price.

If you shoot from a tripod often or stationery subjects like landscapes, posed models, studio shots. The lack of VR might not be very significiant

But if you are shooting hand-held, the VR will come in handy especially when lighting is poor or over-cast sky.

Optics alone....I would admit I cant tell the diff though some Critics might be able to comment on the various difference btw the 2 brands...color tones..distortions...etc

One of my friends has a Sigma and the other has the Nikkor VR and I have used both several times and got hooked on the Nikkor ;p ..... Still its beyond my reach at the moment... :cry:

 

[gadrian]

70-200 AF-S VR and the 70-200 EX HSM..

my take both lenses are hold their ground at each own capacity.

from my usage of the 70-200 EX HSM - the focus is smooth fast and responsive.. though.. not as fast or responsive as the Nikon's AF-S. Both feature FTM (full-time Manual focusing) overide.

image quality - I find the Nikon's more contrasty and a tad bit sharper then the Sigma, bokeh on the Nikon is also buttery smooth at 2.8.

The build of the Nikon feels more solid and to my feel more contoured then the Sigma's. External feel of the EX finish is smooth and good to hold.. but wears down very fast with use.

Both feature a tripod mount.. the Sigma's is removable completely.. however the Nikon's can only remove the foot..

What differentiates both lenses significantly.. is the VR function. The VR function is awesome.. being able to achieve shutter speeds at 1/15 at 2.8 @ ISO200 @ 200mm with sharp images..

The 70-200 Sigma is also more plastic then the Nikon.. the Nikon also feature a new weather coupling ring at the lens mount.

One benefit of the Sigma over the Nikon is the aperture ring.. meaning it can work on bodies that do not have a main/sub dial liek the F100/F5/D1srs/D100/D70/F80/F75/F65.. It will work on your F3.. in manual focusing obviously.. lol and with the aperture ring.

The Sigma is definitely value for money.. second hands going from 850-950.00.. the Nikon is value for performance.. money is really a hole in the pocket.

If you do not require the fast focusing.. it would be nice to also consider the 80-200 AF-D f2.8 ED from Nikon.. (2-touchversion)..

 

[KNIGHT ONG]

I didnt have the chance to test the Sigma lens ...

I just falls in Love with the Nikkor 70-200mm VR at first sight .. ;p It has given me very sharp pictures other then my handshake .. :embrass:

 

[CAMEDIA]

Nikon build is much better than the Sigma and the image produced is much sharper; and VR really helps, esp handheld or when using a lousy tripod. All these amount to the diff in price. For the case of higher price = better quality, this is true between these 2 lens. :bsmilie:

Hope this helps.