Are they in the same league

Started May 8, 2012 | Discussions
marty
Regular MemberPosts: 222
Like?
Are they in the same league
May 8, 2012

Looking at these two lens for my D800
Sigma 70 200mm and Nikon 70 200mm VRll
My question is are they in the same league at all?
Is the Nikon worth $1000 more in IQ and does the Nikon just out shine the

Sigma in all regards? Or does the Sigma shine more then one would expect up against a very well received lens as the Nikon

Would love to hear from someone who has actually tried these two lens side by side
and give some hands on feed back
Thanks

Nikon D800
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
JaronRH
Contributing MemberPosts: 529
Like?
Re: Are they in the same league
In reply to marty, May 9, 2012

I tried the Sigma before getting my Nikon 70-200 VRII. The Sigma I got had a really bad back-focusing problem so I ended up returning it and going with the Nikon. Anyway, the Sigma was very nice but I wouldn't consider it in the same league as the Nikon. It's not quite as sharp as the Nikon wide open and the bokeh will be more nervous then the Nikon for high-contrast backgrounds. If you're ok with the performance wide open (or don't mind stepping down a little), the Sigma is really worth a look (especially when you save almost $1k!). The build is really good (but not weather sealed), the OS functions as advertised, and the HSM AF motor is really quite fast.

Just to warn you though, the backward zoom (compared to Nikon at least) can throw you for a loop at first!

-- hide signature --

-Jaron

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
slimandy
Forum ProPosts: 14,343Gear list
Like?
Re: Are they in the same league
In reply to marty, May 9, 2012

It's not just about IQ, it's about focussing too. If you can afford it it is worth it; if you can't it isn't. I think it's that straight forward.
--
http://www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

 slimandy's gear list:slimandy's gear list
Sony RX100 II Nikon D200 Nikon D700 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Fujifilm X-E1 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
InTheMist
Senior MemberPosts: 2,314Gear list
Like?
Re: Are they in the same league
In reply to JaronRH, May 9, 2012

JaronRH wrote:

I tried the Sigma before getting my Nikon 70-200 VRII.

I also bought a Sigma (non-OS) before buying my 70-200 VRII.

No, they are not in the same league. The VRII is a freak of sharpness, clarity and focus speed. The Sigma was usable, not impressive.

-- hide signature --

Ridicule is not C&C nor is it being helpful nor "stating your opinion"
http://www.flickr.com/InTheMist

 InTheMist's gear list:InTheMist's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon 1 AW1 Nikon Df Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
4Motioner
4Motioner MOD
Regular MemberPosts: 443Gear list
Like?
Re: Are they in the same league
In reply to marty, May 9, 2012

Even the VR1 outshines the Sigma in every aspect. Better build quality, much better IQ wide open, faster focusing.

If you don't want to spend the extra $1000 on the VR2, get the VR1 instead.

The only good side about the Sigma is the price. It's also slightly smaller than the Nikkors.

 4Motioner's gear list:4Motioner's gear list
Sony Alpha 7 Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN Sony FE 28-70mm F3.5-5.6 OSS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bjorn_L
Senior MemberPosts: 4,457Gear list
Like?
Re: Are they in the same league
In reply to marty, May 9, 2012

marty wrote:

Looking at these two lens for my D800
Sigma 70 200mm and Nikon 70 200mm VRll
My question is are they in the same league at all?
Is the Nikon worth $1000 more in IQ and does the Nikon just out shine the

Sigma in all regards? Or does the Sigma shine more then one would expect up against a very well received lens as the Nikon

Would love to hear from someone who has actually tried these two lens side by side
and give some hands on feed back
Thanks

I shot the sigma (non-os) version before getting the Nikon 70-200vr. The Nikon was much better across the board Focus speed, image quality (especially on the long end). Also I found that having a sealed lens quite handy.
--

See my plan (in my profile) for what I shoot with. See my gallery for images I find amusing.

 Bjorn_L's gear list:Bjorn_L's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ5 Canon PowerShot SX30 IS Nikon D700 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
westcoasthd
Regular MemberPosts: 460
Like?
Re: Are they in the same league
In reply to Bjorn_L, May 9, 2012

Agree the Nikon VR I is the best bang for the dollar, better than the sigma. Used 70-200 VR I lenses go for between $1400 to $1600 USD.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
chipmaster
Contributing MemberPosts: 504Gear list
Like?
Re: Are they in the same league
In reply to marty, May 9, 2012

Best IQ in order: VRII, VRI, Tamron, Sigma
Focus: VRII, VRII, Sigma, Tarmon

Value comes down to need/desire. Personally you pay a premium even for used nikon but can often sell for the same of what you bought it. Demand for used Sigma/Tamron is low so maybe you can pick them up for cheap.

I looked at all three but got a VRI used, than later upgraded to a VRII.

Focus I'd say Sigma is close to VRI, IQ not so much
IQ say the Tamron is pretty good to VRI but focus sucks.

marty wrote:

Looking at these two lens for my D800
Sigma 70 200mm and Nikon 70 200mm VRll
My question is are they in the same league at all?
Is the Nikon worth $1000 more in IQ and does the Nikon just out shine the

Sigma in all regards? Or does the Sigma shine more then one would expect up against a very well received lens as the Nikon

Would love to hear from someone who has actually tried these two lens side by side
and give some hands on feed back
Thanks

 chipmaster's gear list:chipmaster's gear list
Nikon 1 V1 Nikon D800E Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Grevture
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,878Gear list
Like?
Agree
In reply to chipmaster, May 9, 2012

chipmaster wrote:

Best IQ in order: VRII, VRI, Tamron, Sigma
Focus: VRII, VRII, Sigma, Tarmon

Value comes down to need/desire. Personally you pay a premium even for used nikon but can often sell for the same of what you bought it. Demand for used Sigma/Tamron is low so maybe you can pick them up for cheap.

I looked at all three but got a VRI used, than later upgraded to a VRII.

Focus I'd say Sigma is close to VRI, IQ not so much
IQ say the Tamron is pretty good to VRI but focus sucks.

That matches my experiences. If focusing speed is not an issue, the Tamron gives a lot of optical quality for the money. Also, just to clarify: There are (basically) two versions of the Sigma 70-200: An older wihich is cheap, lacks stabilization and is decent but not brilliant in IQ, and a newer which is not as cheap, has stabilization and is noticeably better optically, not to far from the Nikon VR I.

-- hide signature --

I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every moment of it!

By the way, film is not dead.
It just smell funny

 Grevture's gear list:Grevture's gear list
Nikon D70s Nikon D3 Nikon D3S Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
anotherMike
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,853
Like?
Re: Are they in the same league
In reply to marty, May 9, 2012

With the Nikon you're getting

a) better build quality
b) definitely better contrast (and microcontrast)
c) better sharpness in the close distance ranges (and by a definite margin)
d) VASTLY faster AF performance

And a lens that should last you a good 7-10 years without letting you down much.

-m

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
incoherent1
Regular MemberPosts: 134
Like?
Possibly useful link
In reply to marty, May 11, 2012

Disclaimer: I do not own or have used the Nikon. I do own and use the sigma. In my own decision-making, I referenced this link.

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/widget/Fullscreen.ashx?reviews=20,16&fullscreen=true&av=4,4&fl=200,200&vis=VisualiserSharpnessMTF,VisualiserSharpnessMTF&stack=horizontal&&config=LensReviewConfiguration.xml%3F1

If the link works as I hope, it is a tool that enables comparison between the two at various focal length and apertures. Indeed the Sigma never (that I can see) surpasses the Nikon, but performs comparably thru enough of the variations that it found a pretty sweet spot on the price/performance curve for me. I bought mine used. The "sweetness" of that spot is of course different for every user, as they allocate whatever funds are available among their own desires.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
sams78
Forum MemberPosts: 63
Like?
Re: Possibly useful link
In reply to incoherent1, May 11, 2012

i am partial to the old 80-200 af-d. If you have a camera that can AF with the AF-D, you can get one for $900 or so in very good condition, used.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Paul Postal USDJ Services
Forum MemberPosts: 51Gear list
Like?
Re: Possibly useful link
In reply to sams78, May 11, 2012

I have both the 80-200AF-D two ring and a 70-200 2.8 VR1. The AF lens is still in the hunt, my pics with this are quite sharp. Convenience has me reaching for the VR-1 more though. I can't speak for the Sigma as I've never used it.

Best,

Paul

 Paul Postal USDJ Services's gear list:Paul Postal USDJ Services's gear list
Nikon D90 Nikon D2X Nikon D3 Nikon D7000 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads