Thoughts on focus speed sigma 120-300mm f2.8 or nikon Vr 2 70-200 f2.8?

[Mashburn]

I have been shooting on canon 70-200 f2.8 is ii with a 7d mk ii. Loved it and the af speed was awesome. I just hate that they were not tack sharp like nikon is. So I made the switch. Soooooo..... What lens do I get for that great af-c speed?

Right now I bought the cheap 70-300 nikon that was 500$. And the speed is 7 out of ten. For what I'm used to. Will the Nikon 70-200 f2.8 or sigma 120-300mm f2.8 be a huge improvement for af-c speed?

Thanks.

Also I'm shooting on a d7200. I prefer crops for sports. To get that extra length and better megapixel. But I might consider the 810 because it can be cropped to a 1.5. I just wish it had a big big jump off improvement at iso to make me feel like spending 1500$ was worth it.

Thanks for the replies.

 

[Overread]

If your 7D + 70-200mm f2.8 IS L MII wasn't sharp something was wrong methinks

But that aside I've the 70-200m f2.8 IS L MII and a Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 OS (non sport edition but far as I'm aware the only change with the sport was the addition of the USB hub setup whcih is long term worth it since it means you can update its firmwire without rechipping)

The 120-300m is going to focus slower than the 70-200mm. It's not a slouch but its not lightning fast either. For me the bigger difference is size and weight; the 70-200mm I can use comfortably all day - the 120-300mm I tend to reach for a monopod or tripod if I want to use it for a long time.

 

[Braineack]

Was this after the firmware update where Canon fixed the 7Dmii focusing issues?

 

[Mashburn]

Was this after the firmware update where Canon fixed the 7Dmii focusing issues?

I never updated it. Knew a couple people who did and they said they saw no difference and so I just continued on in selling it.

 

[Mashburn]

Even froknowsphoto brought it up how canon lacks the tack sharp. And I haven't seen anyone reply to him yet with what's going on.

 

[beagle100]

If your 7D + 70-200mm f2.8 IS L MII wasn't sharp something was wrong methinks
.

yes, if you can't get sharp pics with a 70-200 2.8 IS L II then something is very wrong
see http://www.photozone.de/reviews

 

[Mashburn]

If your 7D + 70-200mm f2.8 IS L MII wasn't sharp something was wrong methinks
.

yes, if you can't get sharp pics with a 70-200 2.8 IS L II then something is very wrong
see http://www.photozone.de/reviews

The link came up it was an error

 

[Mashburn]

If your 7D + 70-200mm f2.8 IS L MII wasn't sharp something was wrong methinks
.

yes, if you can't get sharp pics with a 70-200 2.8 IS L II then something is very wrong
see http://www.photozone.de/reviews

The link came up it was an error

Figured it out. For some reason it left the s off. Anyhow that is talking about the lenses. I'm talking about the camera. Canon rarely has tack sharp. Might be in focus and great looking, but it's not tack sharp. It's like using a macro lens vs a non macro.

 

[Braineack]

Was this after the firmware update where Canon fixed the 7Dmii focusing issues?

I never updated it. Knew a couple people who did and they said they saw no difference and so I just continued on in selling it.

yeah, but that firmware update was specifically to fix the focusing issue with select units that exhibited the problem, if their didn't... anyways, past is past.

 

[Mashburn]

Grabbed my 70-200 f2.8 Vr 2 today. Cannot wait.... But I need the camera. Lol.

I'll be doing the d750. So next week I'll be sporting nice stuff. I had the chance to get the 810 for 400$ more then the 750. But the 810 has more megapixel, but that means more computer storage but great detail in pictures, so that is good and bad. Then the af is slightly slower (and I'm not a sports person) . No tilt (but that's not a reason to say yes or no to). Iso only slightly better. 1/8000 vs 1/4000, great but I honestly rarely shot over 4000 and I know how to fix that problem real quick if I ever get over exposed..... So I just couldn't do it.

Thanks everyone with your help.