Nikon vs Sigma

[HeldInTheMoment]

So I am going to be purchasing a 70-200 f/2.8 soon and I cannot decide between the Nikkor and Sigma. Of course I prefer the Nikkor, but the price point is so much higher than the Sigma.

Advise, Experience, Thoughts?

 

[nerwin]

When 70-200 2.8? VR1 or VR2?

 

[HeldInTheMoment]

VRII preferred of course, but the VRI price point is more affordable...

 

[nerwin]

VRII preferred of course, but the VRI price point is more affordable...

Both Sigma & Tamron make decent 70-200 2.8, but I think Nikon's 70-200 VR2 has the edge.

BTW, I just noticed your in Vermont! Awesome...so am I!

 

[HeldInTheMoment]

I know they both offer a decent 70-200 f/2.8 and that Nikkor certainly takes the cake at the end of the day, but for the price points...does Sigma offer a good "bang for buck" or is it better to just bite the bullet and get the Nikkor?

 

[goooner]

I'm saving up for the Tamron, very good by all accounts, except for the vignetting wide open at 200mm, if the few reviews I've read are true. I'm sure some of the users on here would be able to elaborate more the 'issue'.

 

[nerwin]

I know they both offer a decent 70-200 f/2.8 and that Nikkor certainly takes the cake at the end of the day, but for the price points...does Sigma offer a good "bang for buck" or is it better to just bite the bullet and get the Nikkor?

I shouldn't say much as I don't have any experience with these lenses. But I did have a friend who had the Sigma and didn't like it and ending up buying Nikon's and was happy. But he could have just had a lemon from Sigma. It happens. I also know ones who have the Sigma and are very happy and don't notice much difference.

One of the benefits of buying Nikon's "pro grade" glass is that fact the value holds. Even years down the road, you can sell it for nearly as much as you bought it for.

When I had the 17-55 2.8, I ended up selling it for more than what bought it for haha.

 

[robbins.photo]

So I am going to be purchasing a 70-200 f/2.8 soon and I cannot decide between the Nikkor and Sigma. Of course I prefer the Nikkor, but the price point is so much higher than the Sigma.

Advise, Experience, Thoughts?

I use a Sigma 70-200 mm OS myself, love the lens. It's always performed to my satisfaction, never given me any trouble. The one thing about mine, I bought it used so it does have older firmware. As a result the OS feature on it will sometimes try to engage even when I'm shooting at shutter speeds that are high enough that it shouldn't. I could send it to Sigma to have the firmware updated, however I never bothered - I just switch the OS off unless I'm shooting at shutter speeds low enough that it might be needed.

The thing about the Nikkor VR1 you should consider is that it is designed for DX rather than FX, so if your shooting FX or you plan on upgrading to FX in the future you'd most likely want to consider the Sigma or the VRII. I haven't shot the Nikkor VRI or VRII myself personally, from the reviews I read their image quality is rated higher and of course they hold their resell value better, the only question really is does that warrant the difference in price for you personally.

As for my part I've always been happy with the Sigma and it was a good investment for me, YMMV of course.

 

[jaomul]

It's a big purchase, if your not sure sit on your money a few days and do a little more research.

The Nikon vr II is excellent, apparently the vr1 is every bit as good if your are using a crop sensor camera. The tamron vc model gets mostly thumbs up at a much lower price point.

The siggy gets the least favourable review of the lot, but anything I've seen from the sigma looks great

 

[goodguy]

Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 OS is a good lens but for 100$ extra dollars you can get the Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 VC which is better
I would recommend going for the Tamron but if you dont want it for some reason as I said the Sigma is a good lens too.

 

[HeldInTheMoment]

Glad I asked here, I was under the impression Tamron was the least favorable in the 70-200 f/2.8 line ups

 

[Trever1t]

So I am going to be purchasing a 70-200 f/2.8 soon and I cannot decide between the Nikkor and Sigma. Of course I prefer the Nikkor, but the price point is so much higher than the Sigma.

Advise, Experience, Thoughts?

I use a Sigma 70-200 mm OS myself, love the lens. It's always performed to my satisfaction, never given me any trouble. The one thing about mine, I bought it used so it does have older firmware. As a result the OS feature on it will sometimes try to engage even when I'm shooting at shutter speeds that are high enough that it shouldn't. I could send it to Sigma to have the firmware updated, however I never bothered - I just switch the OS off unless I'm shooting at shutter speeds low enough that it might be needed.

The thing about the Nikkor VR1 you should consider is that it is designed for DX rather than FX, so if your shooting FX or you plan on upgrading to FX in the future you'd most likely want to consider the Sigma or the VRII. I haven't shot the Nikkor VRI or VRII myself personally, from the reviews I read their image quality is rated higher and of course they hold their resell value better, the only question really is does that warrant the difference in price for you personally.

As for my part I've always been happy with the Sigma and it was a good investment for me, YMMV of course.

That is a FALSE STATEMENT. The v1 is a FX lens. It also has a slightest advantage in the center over the v2 whereas the v2 has the better edges.

 

[Braineack]

You mispelled Tamron.

 

[Trever1t]

I have owned both The v1 and the V2 Nikon 70 to 200 mm lenses. They are both exceptional lenses. And as far as I'm concerned there is no aftermarket equal.

There's very few lenses that give results such as these 2.

 

[Braineack]

Glad I asked here, I was under the impression Tamron was the least favorable in the 70-200 f/2.8 line ups

Said no one with a Sigma or Tamron 70-200 ever.