70-200~Nikon or Sigma

System

Looking to purchase a 70-200 2.8 lens with stabilization. I'm looking for some opinions on the Sigma with the OS or the Nikon with the VR-ll. There is a price difference but is the Nikon really $500 better than the Sigma?
If it makes any difference, I'll be using this lens on my D300s.

insanefred

Just fyi, the Sigma lower their price one their 70-200mm 2.8 OS to $1400.
Link:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1101/110131015sigma70200mmpricedrop.asp

angevin1

captain78 wrote: »

.....but is the Nikon really $500 better than the Sigma?
If it makes any difference, I'll be using this lens on my D300s.

It depends on your needs:

Do you need or want to be able to shoot wide open AND have the images be their sharpest?

Do you need to be able to Shoot and not worry as much about light entering the front elements?

Do you need weather sealing?

According to the review linked, if your answer to any of those questions is a definitive yes, then you need to pony up for the Nikon.

I have the Nikon. I shoot it wide open very often. I have rarely experienced any issues with light entering the elements. I haven't noticed any difference in sharpness stopped down or not. I have had occasional difficulty getting AF under extremely dark ambient.
It is a consistent performer and renders pleasing colors and contrast.

Art Scott

Actually buying a nikon does not guarantee any of the above......I have been shooting with Sigma for a very long time and have never had a prob....I shoot in pouring rain and blowing sand....they get used in all sorts of adverse conditions....I have not moved to the model with OS ........I also have a Nikon with VR.......personally I see no value in paying extra for the Nikon.......with Sigma you get a much closer focusing ability than with Nikon....it may not be true Macro but it is close enuff for wedding and portraits.......My current Sigma has rendered extremely pleasing colors and contrast even when it was exposing film ........

Harryb

I shot with both lenses in their earlier reincarnations and the Nikon version was a better lens. It had better IQ and faster AF.

angevin1

captain78 wrote: »

If it makes any difference, I'll be using this lens on my D300s.

Another thought that does come to mind is many reviews from many knowledgeable folks say the VR1 on a crop-cam is just as good as the VR2. Which as you may or may not know, means quite a savings in buying the VR1 over the VR2.

Matthew Saville

Yep, it all depends on how heavily you'll use the lens. If you shoot sports ALL THE TIME, and this is your main, main lens, then you might wanna pony up and invest in the best. If however you're just getting this lens to "cover a base", then the Sigma will definitely be all you ever need.

As another mentioned, the Nikon 70-200 VR mk1 is awesome on a crop sensor. If you shoot in broad daylight conditions and plan to use a crop sensor as often as possible for the extra reach, the Nikon 70-200 VR mk1 is a great buy.

I will say that I'm definitely a fan of Sigma lenses and I've owned one EX lens since 2005, and another since 2006, and they have served me well. They've been dropped, abused, etc. and still perform like champs. Of course I send them in for service every couple years, but you should send in all your gear every few years for a tune-up / checkup anyways, that's not a Sigma thing lol, it's a responsible professional thing. ;-)

Good luck either way!

=Matt=

System

Thanks for all the advice. I pulled the trigger on a Nikon 70-200 VRll today. I should have it next week. My local camera store matched the big box store's price.