80-400 Nikon or Sigma

[Jonathan Reed]

I am wondering if anyone has had experience with both of these lenses. I owned the Nikon 800-400VR and sold it some time ago, and I miss that reach.

I read somewhere that the Sigma 80-400 was as sharp as the Nikon. Can anyone offer an opinion?

Thanks!!

 

[Pradipta Dutta]

Me and a friend of mine once did a little comparison (including one full day of shooting at the Woodside) on these two lenses and found the following -

1) Nikkor's VR was at least a stop better than Sigma OS

2) Image quality on the two lenses were very comparable and there was no clear winner
3) Build quality of the Nikkor was clearly better
4) The Nikkor had 5 years warranty while the Sigma had 4
5) The Sigma is longer than the Nikkor (7.5 in. compared to 6.7 in.)
6) Sigma is significantly heavier at 3.6 lb. compared to 2.9 lb. of the Nikkor
7) Nikkor was $300 more expensive (now it is only $230 more)

Hence I ended up buying the Nikkor.

--
Speed is significant and interesting but accuracy is downright fascinating
http://www.pbase.com/pradipta

 

[Wally OZ]

I am wondering if anyone has had experience with both of these
lenses. I owned the Nikon 800-400VR and sold it some time ago, and
I miss that reach.

I read somewhere that the Sigma 80-400 was as sharp as the Nikon.
Can anyone offer an opinion?

Hi Jonathan,

I am sure you miss the reach.

I haven't used the Nikon, I have read that the Sigma is sharper.

I have the Sigma 80-400 OS purchased it in January this year, used it a lot I am very happy with the results.

I purchased the lens by accident as I had already dismissed it based on a lot of negative reports I had read.

Having owned the lens, looking back on those reports they are from someone who read that someone else wrote it was blah blah but not personal experience, basically gossip turns into fact.

The next thing people go on and on about is focusing speed and focus noise, the OS has an internal focus motor, it's not HSM but focuses at the same speed as my Sigma 70-200 HSM and Sigma 50-500 HSM, I am using it on a D70.

It makes a sound similar to the body focus motor, it sounds slow if you listen to the sound but in fact it is not slow.

It is sharp wide open, the OS works a treat, I regulalry obtain sharp clear images at 400mm f5.6 at 1/30 sec hand held, and I am not great at hand holding a lens, at very slow shutter speeds I shoot a burst of 3 pics and pick the best, one will be sharp.

I have read reports that the paint peels off and other cosmetic faults, I don't baby my lens as I do use it a lot, the paint is worn on the edge of the tripod foot beacuse it rubbed against a rough surface on a long trip in the car, to me its' a tool to be used and enjoyed, the results is what matters to me nothing else.

Thanks!!

 

[Colin van Zyl]

Everyone seems to have their own opinions which makes difficult to obtan an objective comparison. Professional reviews are often the best but not necessarily flawless.

Popular Photography reviewed the Sigma in September 2004. You can see the review here:
http://www.popphoto.com/article.asp?section_id=2&article_id=1111

Popular Photography also did quite an interesting VR comparison. Unlike most tests on this forum where a few shots are taken and a call has to be made, they used several (experienced) photographers and a total of 3,500 shots before drawing conclusions. The results of the the test are available here:
http://www.popphoto.com/article.asp?section_id=2&article_id=1039&page_number=1

They concluded that the additional effective stops obtained are 1.0 (80mm), 1.3 (250mm) and 2.0 (400mm) for the Nikon. The Sigma OS delivered 1.0 (80mm), 1.6 (250mm) and 2.0 (400mm). Clearly no significant difference but a slight advantage going to the Sigma.

I can concur with Wally Oz's comments on fast focussing of the Sigma. The Nikon uses the internal camera motor and is therefore dependent on the particular body used.

 

[Wally OZ]

Colin,

Than you for the links, the Popular photography article is interesting reading, I had not see it it before.

It states that it is easier to hold a smaller camera steady, that is not my experience, I did my own testing a while ago comparing my Panasonic FZ20 at max 12x zoom against my D70 with Sigma 80-400 OS at 400mm with a subject about 12 feet away. I supected the larger camera and heavier lens made the task easier, I was achieveing more keepers with the Sigma 80-400 OS than the FZ20, my test confirmed this and not by a small margin, I think it makes sense that a heavier object has more inertia and that inertia helps in this instance.

Everyone seems to have their own opinions which makes difficult to
obtan an objective comparison. Professional reviews are often the
best but not necessarily flawless.

Popular Photography reviewed the Sigma in September 2004. You can
see the review here:
http://www.popphoto.com/article.asp?section_id=2&article_id=1111

Popular Photography also did quite an interesting VR comparison.
Unlike most tests on this forum where a few shots are taken and a
call has to be made, they used several (experienced) photographers
and a total of 3,500 shots before drawing conclusions. The results
of the the test are available here:
http://www.popphoto.com/article.asp?section_id=2&article_id=1039&page_number=1

They concluded that the additional effective stops obtained are 1.0
(80mm), 1.3 (250mm) and 2.0 (400mm) for the Nikon. The Sigma OS
delivered 1.0 (80mm), 1.6 (250mm) and 2.0 (400mm). Clearly no
significant difference but a slight advantage going to the Sigma.

I can concur with Wally Oz's comments on fast focussing of the
Sigma. The Nikon uses the internal camera motor and is therefore
dependent on the particular body used.