Reading mode: Light Dark

SIGMA 70-200 OS finally shipping ?

Go to last post
G

gwexou

Leading Member
Messages
867
Solutions
1
Reaction score
151
Location
dubai, AE
I Cant believe that sigma sell this for 1700 bucks. i thought this will priced like around 1100 bucks.

canon and nikon are being an ass by charging so much money when they just add VR on the lens. and now sigma following their steps.

adding VR probably only cost them around 100 bucks even less, and now the jack up the price around 900 bucks for OS.

these companies are really smart.

I am very curious to see if this new sigma can sell well because with that much, people will most likely pick up the NIKON VR 1.
 
nikonfreak said:
I Cant believe that sigma sell this for 1700 bucks. i thought this will priced like around 1100 bucks.

I am very curious to see if this new sigma can sell well because with that much, people will most likely pick up the NIKON VR 1.
Click to expand...
Likewise. If I can ever get together that much spare change, I'll certainly look for a used Nikon VR1 version in good condition. I assume that Canon users would make a comparable choice.

The only thing I can figure is that Sigma thinks there will be sufficient demand from other than Nikon and Canon users. I believe they'll find they're wrong. I wouldn't be surprised to see the street price eventually come down to c. US$1100, at which price they could tap the Nikon and Canon markets.
 
thanks , I may be order one and compare it to the vR2 that I already have and if the VR2 is vastly better than the Sigma , I will sell the VR2 since I found I use this focal range less and less often these days.

Thanks and I can't wait to see their new 85f1.4 HSM and Samiyong 8mm FE.
gwenhael appere said:
Hi everybody,

amazon is now posting the Sigma 70-200 OS for 1699 USD for Canon mount, with shipping "within one to three weeks" ( http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-70-200mm-2-8-Telephoto-Canon/dp/B003HC8V9A )

Is that true ? Anybody got their hand on it ? And any news for Nikon mount ?

Thanks !

gwen
Click to expand...
 
well, it is cheaper much cheaper than my VR2 and you call it( because ti si Sigma branded) expensive?

I think this new Sigma must be much better than the original VR1 optically since it has 3 FLD elements.
nikonfreak said:
I Cant believe that sigma sell this for 1700 bucks. i thought this will priced like around 1100 bucks.

canon and nikon are being an ass by charging so much money when they just add VR on the lens. and now sigma following their steps.

adding VR probably only cost them around 100 bucks even less, and now the jack up the price around 900 bucks for OS.

these companies are really smart.

I am very curious to see if this new sigma can sell well because with that much, people will most likely pick up the NIKON VR 1.
Click to expand...
 
maybe you are right , sadly though , many people care for names not real lens quality.
SantaFeBill said:
nikonfreak said:
I Cant believe that sigma sell this for 1700 bucks. i thought this will priced like around 1100 bucks.

I am very curious to see if this new sigma can sell well because with that much, people will most likely pick up the NIKON VR 1.
Click to expand...
Likewise. If I can ever get together that much spare change, I'll certainly look for a used Nikon VR1 version in good condition. I assume that Canon users would make a comparable choice.

The only thing I can figure is that Sigma thinks there will be sufficient demand from other than Nikon and Canon users. I believe they'll find they're wrong. I wouldn't be surprised to see the street price eventually come down to c. US$1100, at which price they could tap the Nikon and Canon markets.
Click to expand...
 
thanks for that link , the price is too high 1299 BP, is about 2500USD.

this one is no more interesting to me.
Dhruva said:
Beware, the Sigma probably weighs 1970 grams :O as opposed to 1540 grams for the Nikon VR2. If that's true, for me, it's a deal breaker. Not many websites have published the weight. This is one that does: http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-Sigma-70-200mm-f2-8-EX-DG-OS-HSM-Nikon-Fit/p1519642?cm_mmc=GoogleBase-_-Camera-Lenses-_-Nikon-Fit-_-Sigma-70-200mm-f2-8-EX-DG-OS-HSM-Nikon-Fit_1519642
Click to expand...
 
way to expensive, i doubt its worth its price, better buying the one with no os and save alot of money.
 
Dhruva said:
Beware, the Sigma probably weighs 1970 grams :O as opposed to 1540 grams for the Nikon VR2. If that's true, for me, it's a deal breaker. Not many websites have published the weight. This is one that does: http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-Sigma-70-200mm-f2-8-EX-DG-OS-HSM-Nikon-Fit/p1519642?cm_mmc=GoogleBase-_-Camera-Lenses-_-Nikon-Fit-_-Sigma-70-200mm-f2-8-EX-DG-OS-HSM-Nikon-Fit_1519642
Click to expand...
Not sure that this is right, Amazon are listing the weight as 2.5lb which is around 1150g; that seems a bit light. 1970g is the weight of the 50-500 OS which was announced at the same time so I think warehouse express have mixed up their figures. The old lens is 1345g.
 
pandalee said:
I think this new Sigma must be much better than the original VR1 optically since it has 3 FLD elements.
nikonfreak wrote:
Click to expand...
I think you're right. The Sigma 8-16mm is the best DX UWA out there now, and it only goes for $700. Imagine how good a lens with $1700 worth of optics could do. With the 8-16mm, Sigma has proven they can make exceptional lenses, and the 70-200 OS is in the same batch of new lens types along with the 50-500 OS, another exceptional lens.

I think people are just assuming that because it's Sigma and not Nikon, it's not going to be as good as Nikon glass. Sigma has seen how good the Nikon 70-200 VRII is, and still chose to go with this price. They're not stupid, so I suspect they already know how well their lens competes. I would not be a bit surprised if it was as good at the 70-200 VRII optically (maybe less good at 200mm but better elsewhere in the focal range), and figure that once people starts noticing this (if it's true), they'll start buying.

So I ask people, if the Sigma 70-200 OS were as good as the Nikon VRII, what price would you set for it?
 
hoof said:
So I ask people, if the Sigma 70-200 OS were as good as the Nikon VRII, what price would you set for it?
Click to expand...
If the Sigma is as good as the Nikon VRII and sells at 77% ($1,700/$2,220 (BH price)) of of the VRII price I don't thinks it's a bad deal.

We'll just have to see how good it is. In the mean time I'll stick with my Nikon 80-200 af-s. I'm very happy with it as I either shoot faster shutter speed are use a monopod.
--
Snapshott
 
hoof said:
I think you're right. The Sigma 8-16mm is the best DX UWA out there now, and it only goes for $700. Imagine how good a lens with $1700 worth of optics could do. With the 8-16mm, Sigma has proven they can make exceptional lenses, and the 70-200 OS is in the same batch of new lens types along with the 50-500 OS, another exceptional lens.

I think people are just assuming that because it's Sigma and not Nikon, it's not going to be as good as Nikon glass. Sigma has seen how good the Nikon 70-200 VRII is, and still chose to go with this price. They're not stupid, so I suspect they already know how well their lens competes. I would not be a bit surprised if it was as good at the 70-200 VRII optically (maybe less good at 200mm but better elsewhere in the focal range), and figure that once people starts noticing this (if it's true), they'll start buying.

So I ask people, if the Sigma 70-200 OS were as good as the Nikon VRII, what price would you set for it?
Click to expand...
i totally agree with this. actually i ve thought about this like you. they must be a fool if they dont come up with the quality to set the price of this lens this high.

and yeah, i remember people raving about 8-16 and its got the FLD element. so maybe this new 70-200 OS will deliver. but I am still terrified with sigma QC, sample variation.

if it was as good as VR 2, i am still thinking that 1700 is asking too much.

the VR 1 was 1700 bucks and sigma 70-200 was like 700 around that time (so its like 41% of price of nikon)

so now VR 2 cost 2200 bucks, so i expect sigma to be around 900 - 1000 bucks. that would be right. 1100 tops. but 1700 is asking too much no matter from what angle i am lookin at it.

but hey, i am also excited to see what sigma can bring to the table with their new 70-200 and 85.

and if they can do well, then tamron and tokina will start to follow their steps and what this means that we as customer will have more options in the future : )
 
What the hell is that pricey monster? And may I ask, albeit naively, what is the difference between that and this half price chunker? http://www.araicamera.net/shop/prod_detail.php?pid=713893
--
http://dailybento.webs.com/

Hmmm, what shall I do in my signature? Outline the scores of lenses and camera bodies I have to make people think I'm a better photographer? Or maybe some inciteful pearl of wisdom from some revered and oft quoted dead photographer so that people know I'm well read on the topic?
Decisions decisions, maybe I'll just leave it blank.
 
Hell, that monster comes out, and suddenly all of the older non-OS models have shot up by about 20,000yen! Perhaps I'd better jump on a Tamron before they do the same thing.
--
http://dailybento.webs.com/

Hmmm, what shall I do in my signature? Outline the scores of lenses and camera bodies I have to make people think I'm a better photographer? Or maybe some inciteful pearl of wisdom from some revered and oft quoted dead photographer so that people know I'm well read on the topic?
Decisions decisions, maybe I'll just leave it blank.
 
Its good news that the lens is finally shipping. I eagerly await the reviews. I thought the price was way over what I was thinking before a price was set. I was thinking it was going to compete with the nikon 80-200nn2.8
 
nikonfreak said:
the VR 1 was 1700 bucks and sigma 70-200 was like 700 around that time (so its like 41% of price of nikon)

so now VR 2 cost 2200 bucks, so i expect sigma to be around 900 - 1000 bucks. that would be right. 1100 tops. but 1700 is asking too much no matter from what angle i am lookin at it.
Click to expand...
The VR1 isn't the correct comparison point. The Sigma 70-200 non-OS competed with Nikon's 80-200 F/2.8, not the VR enabled version. Saying it was half the price of the Nikon is unfair, since the VR added $650ish to the pricetag.

So, the Sigma 70-200 F/2.8 at $700 competed with Nikon's 80-200 F/2.8 at $1050. Now if the new 70-200 F/2.8 OS is as good as the Nikon VRII, then a similar price difference (in percent) puts them squarely in the $1600-$1700 pricerange.

Another factor to consider is the fact that Nikon charged $650 for the VR ($1700 or so for the VRI vs $1050 for the non-VR 80-200). Should Sigma give that feature away for free?
 
hoof said:
The VR1 isn't the correct comparison point. The Sigma 70-200 non-OS competed with Nikon's 80-200 F/2.8, not the VR enabled version. Saying it was half the price of the Nikon is unfair, since the VR added $650ish to the pricetag.

So, the Sigma 70-200 F/2.8 at $700 competed with Nikon's 80-200 F/2.8 at $1050. Now if the new 70-200 F/2.8 OS is as good as the Nikon VRII, then a similar price difference (in percent) puts them squarely in the $1600-$1700 pricerange.

Another factor to consider is the fact that Nikon charged $650 for the VR ($1700 or so for the VRI vs $1050 for the non-VR 80-200). Should Sigma give that feature away for free?
Click to expand...
ahhh, it makes sense now. okay my bad. i guess i got the comparison wrong then.

well, with 1700, they have to surpass nikon VR 1 for sure. this is a lil bit hard to do imho. but damn, its just hard to digest, 1600 bucks for sigma lens??

I dont know. maybe i am ignorant. i still prefer nikon for that much. its more reliable and it says NIKON. bwakakakkakaka
 
so, basically you are trying to say you will pay 500 US more for Nikon name alone over Sigma of the same or identical quality?
nikonfreak said:
nikonfreak said:
I think you're right. The Sigma 8-16mm is the best DX UWA out there now, and it only goes for $700. Imagine how good a lens with $1700 worth of optics could do. With the 8-16mm, Sigma has proven they can make exceptional lenses, and the 70-200 OS is in the same batch of new lens types along with the 50-500 OS, another exceptional lens.

I think people are just assuming that because it's Sigma and not Nikon, it's not going to be as good as Nikon glass. Sigma has seen how good the Nikon 70-200 VRII is, and still chose to go with this price. They're not stupid, so I suspect they already know how well their lens competes. I would not be a bit surprised if it was as good at the 70-200 VRII optically (maybe less good at 200mm but better elsewhere in the focal range), and figure that once people starts noticing this (if it's true), they'll start buying.

So I ask people, if the Sigma 70-200 OS were as good as the Nikon VRII, what price would you set for it?
Click to expand...
i totally agree with this. actually i ve thought about this like you. they must be a fool if they dont come up with the quality to set the price of this lens this high.

and yeah, i remember people raving about 8-16 and its got the FLD element. so maybe this new 70-200 OS will deliver. but I am still terrified with sigma QC, sample variation.

if it was as good as VR 2, i am still thinking that 1700 is asking too much.

the VR 1 was 1700 bucks and sigma 70-200 was like 700 around that time (so its like 41% of price of nikon)

so now VR 2 cost 2200 bucks, so i expect sigma to be around 900 - 1000 bucks. that would be right. 1100 tops. but 1700 is asking too much no matter from what angle i am lookin at it.

but hey, i am also excited to see what sigma can bring to the table with their new 70-200 and 85.

and if they can do well, then tamron and tokina will start to follow their steps and what this means that we as customer will have more options in the future : )
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top