Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 vs Nikon 80-200mm AF-D f2.8

[Ripsnort]

I recently purchased a Nikon 80-200mm AF-D f2.8 which I am very pleased with. My business partner is also looking to purchase a zoom lens in this range, and she has questioned the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 quality...she doesn't have the budget for a used Nikon, but she does have the budget for the sigma. I know little about the Sigma lens, feed back if you have time. Thank you.

[SigmaSD9]

Ripsnort wrote:

I recently purchased a Nikon 80-200mm AF-D f2.8 which I am very pleased with. My business partner is also looking to purchase a zoom lens in this range, and she has questioned the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 quality...she doesn't have the budget for a used Nikon, but she does have the budget for the sigma. I know little about the Sigma lens, feed back if you have time. Thank you.

Sigma's lenses are good for the money but they are not as good as Nikon or Canon professional lenses. There are some Sigma/Canon lens comparisons here

http://www.sigmadslr.com/lenses.htm

You can see the Sigma 70-200 has inferior sharpness especially wide open, plus poor color and contrast compared to the Canon 70-200 L. In addition the Sigma has lighter build quality and around 1/3rd the focus speed. I would stick with professional brand name lenses if you can, but if you can't the Sigma is a fine discount lens.

[DirkG]

Well given the fact that at B&H there is almost no price-difference between the Nikon and the Sigma, I would get the Nikon.



http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ughType=search

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ughType=search

[danielchtong]

DirkG wrote:

Well given the fact that at B&H there is almost no price-difference between the Nikon and the Sigma, I would get the Nikon.



http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ughType=search

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ughType=search

I beg to disagree from the Pentax camp as the Sigma has Pentax mount.

Sigma obviously is a very viable alternative particularly with the Pentax mount with V R. Pentax calls that S R. Canon calls that I S.
Here is one wide open at F2.8








and here is one just half stop down at F3.5



http://www.pbase.com/danieltong/image/74188404/original for original and exif
It was a impromptu snap, low light and no flash shot done inside B&H last March. I did not buy that and I regret that .

Nowaday, the lens (Pentax mount) has been completely sold out both in Europe and N Am . I suggest you try that.

With the 2 stop advantage of the VR/I S on Pentax mount, the lens is , I can tell you Sir , very formidable indeed compared with the best. I would not say better as quality in this range is very subjective.

Daniel , Toronto

ps. when I took the 2nd shot it was a lowly DL body with no V R.

[Caboose]

Sigma's EX series lenses are on par with both Nikon's and Canon's pro lenses, build quality and image quality. I'm sure there will be lot's of people disagree with that statement, but none could probably look and images taken with an Nikon 70-200, Canon 70-200, or Sigma 70-200 and tell which was which. I've been a Canon user since about 1971, when I was ready to get my 70-200mm f/2.8 I tested both Canon "L" and Sigma EX lenses, and as far as image quality and build quality there was really very very little difference.

[Nick-On]

I am reasonably new to the photography hobby. My brother recommended one of these lenses so I bought one. I was naive inthinking that I could simply replace the 18-135mm lens on my new D80, so I put on the new lens and took off down the road to a motorcycle shop to snap a few shots of my favourite subject - bikes... I very quickly learned a lens of this size is not for showroom work as I had to go over to the other side of the showroom to get the bike(s) competely into the shot. Trying to get closeups was,, well let's say I got some good shot of petrol tanks, name badges, handlebars and speedos and various other parts of bikes. I was so busy looking for that perfect shot that I didn't notice the salesguy who was desperately trying to get a response from me - "Can I help you?",, "Are you ok there?". I was too busy looking through that viewfinder, trying to get the correct distance from the bike(s) to fit them fully into the shot... I looked up at him and said "Oh, I'm beyond help" - which is my standard answer to "Can I help you",,, then I moved onto the next shot,, leaving the salesguy standing there, mouth agape...

Once I got home I immediately transferred the shots to the PC and looked at them. Most of the shots were way "too close" for what I was trying to achieve, but those I did get right were absolutely beautiful. On the way home, I also got a few country type shots and I was also highly impressed with the results... I am no expert but good photos aregood photos and I soon recognize them...

Ilearned where to and where not to use this lens...!!!

[JohnG]

SigmaSD9 wrote:

You can see the Sigma 70-200 has inferior sharpness especially wide open, plus poor color and contrast compared to the Canon 70-200 L. In addition the Sigma has lighter build quality and around 1/3rd the focus speed. I would stick with professional brand name lenses if you can, but if you can't the Sigma is a fine discount lens.

Sorry - this is hogwash. There is virtually no difference in IQ between the Sigma and the Canon or Nikon. The Canon will focus slightly faster in low light - but it is by no means 2/3 faster - that's just wrong.

In general the Sigma is about 90% as good as the Canon or Nikon lenses - with that 10% being slightly better AF in low lightand less prone to purple fringing.

Now, it does appear there have been more reports of 'bad copies' of the sigma lens. That I can't vouch for one way or the other.

Here are some shots from the 70-200 2.8 wide open









With a 1.4x TC:







So, if your friend could afford the Nikon, definitely go that route. But if it isn't feasible, absolutely the Sigma is a capable alternative.

[DRGSin]

Hard to argue with proof like that!

[mtclimber]

Thanks, JohnG-

... for treating us to some more great sports photo samples. Based on your recommendations I have picked up the Sigma XT F 2.8 70-200mm lens and a Canon 20D body.

We are on our way home from doing workshops in Europe.

MT/Sarah

[vIZnquest]

I believe the Sigma has HSM the Nikon has no motor like the much more expensive (discontinued) AF-S model. The Nikon AF-S is faster than the AF-D but the image quality are the same.

I feel that the Sigma is on par with the Nikon equivalent and may even be a bit faster due to the HSM feature. This is an opinion mind you and nothing upholds it other than the information I have found and the findings they have made using itand photo posts by others.

I do have the Nikon 80-200 2.8AF-D by the way. I like it.