70-200 2.8: Sigma vs Nikon?

[jpnatale]

I currently have the Sigma version of the 70-200 OS lens, bought it for 1400 new last year. Been considering selling it and buying a used version of the Nikon 70-200 VR. Looks like I could get one for ~$1300 used, and probably sell my Sigma for what, $900?

The question is would this be worth it. No real complaints about the sigma so far, just thinking the slight increase in IQ/sharpness that the Nikon version supposedly has might be worth the cash.

Anyone have experience with both lenses? Thanks for your input!

 

[tirediron]

If you've got a lens that covers that range and you're happy with it, why change? I've not used the Sigma, but I do know I love my 70-200; it's a beautiful piece of glass.

 

[jpnatale]

mostly thinking it's a "i don't know what i'm missing" with the nicer Nikon glass. I went sigma for money reasons last year, now wondering if that was a mistake and should sell it to upgrade to the nikon version for its higher quality

 

[Mach0]

Rent it first and base the decision off of that.

 

[baturn]

John, don't try to talk him out of it. I don't have a 70 - 200 yet. Just sayin!

 

[Mully]

Why not rent and see if it is worth it for you.

 

[jpnatale]

Why not rent and see if it is worth it for you.

I probably will. I want to know what you guys think of the difference

 

[grafxman]

Whenever I want to know something about a lens I read reviews of that lens at Amazon, BHPhoto, search google, etc. They both have pretty high ratings. I doubt you're missing much by not having a Nikkor lens. If you're really curious, as several here have said, rent the Nikkor and make some test shots.