Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 or Nikon 80-200mm f2.8?

[ultimadrift]

Both of these lenses are around the same price. Which one would be a better choice? Old Nikon seems to have a faster AF. However Sigma has 10mm on the wider end. Not sure which one to pick

 

[D-B-J]

I love my 80-200 2.8, but i have not used the sigma.. Still, Nikon lenses hold their value more than third party lenses.

 

[Sw1tchFX]

neither is amazing, i'd spring for a 300 f/4 instead.

 

[ultimadrift]

Troll? Other lenses more versatile

 

[KmH]

The 10 mm difference between 70 mm and 80 mm is about a step. What would you be using the lens for?

Which Nikon 80-200 mm f/2.8? The AF 80-200 mm f/2.8D 2-ring? The AF-S 80-200 mm f/2.8G 2-ring? The AF 80-200 mm f/2.8D push/pull?

All 3 have quite good optical quality, but there are quite a few good used examples of the Nikon AF-S 70-200 mm f/2.8G VRI that can be had for not much more $$$'s.

 

[ultimadrift]

Ive only found the AF 80-200 f2.8D. Can't seem to find the VR1 anywhere

 

[mjbine]

I have the nikon 80-200mm f2.8 and love it. Use it mostly for gymnastics and karate photographs.

 

[KmH]

Ive only found the AF 80-200 f2.8D. Can't seem to find the VR1 anywhere

You're right! I can't either! :scratch:

 

[mwcfarms]

Ive only found the AF 80-200 f2.8D. Can't seem to find the VR1 anywhere

I didn't think the 80 to 200 had VR period. Are you thinking of the 70-200 VR1, the first version of this lens? I have been debating this whole scenario as well, the VRII 70 to 200 is soooo expensive and sooo frucking heavy. Not really sure what I am going to do. Then there is the slight chance the sigma wont work on my D700. Maybe I should just stick to buying primes. Keep the debate rolling on this lol.

 

[flea77]

I have used a 80-200 2.8D two ring for quite some time, and played with the sigma 70-200 as I was thinking of buying it instead. The Nikon does hold it's value better but I was more concerned with sharpness (Nikon wins) and build quality (Nikon wins again). Now I am not really knocking the siggy, it was a great lens, but when I can get a slightly better lens for the same money that will also hold it's value better, that was a no brainer for me. No problems at all, no regrets at all, love the lens.

Now in all fairness, I use the 80-200 less now that I have a 120-300 2.8 siggy, the 80-200 goes inside and for events, the 120-300 is all I use for sports at any distance, and then I could always put on the 1.4x Kenko for a 168-420 f4, and with crop that gets me to 630mm at f4, heh.

Allan

 

[Bynx]

I have two lenses by Sigma -- 28mm Aspherical 1:1.8D EX DG and a 28mm to 300mm Aspherical IF. They are around 10 years old and both work fine with the new D7000. The D7000 keeps its all its auto features as well as focus. So I would imagine your Sigma will work with your D700.

 

[Texas Parrothead]

I have the Sigma 70-200 2.8 and love it!!!!!

 

[zamanakhan]

iam in the same boat right now wondering if i should pick up a used sigma 70-200 2.8 for about 650 used (they pop up for that much quite often) or a used 80-200 2.8 nikon for 1000, If i purchase the sigma i can get the new 50 1.8 thats coming out or possibly a 3rd flash.... or i can just get the nikon. Iam not quite sure what i should do, i've even considered just buying a d7000 and buying an AF 80-200 and an Af 50 1.8, its a pretty good option also my 2 flashes would kinda act as 3 as there is CLS available which my d5000 doesnt have...

 

[djacobox372]

I have the nikon 80-200mm af-s, it's an awesome lens--better optically then the newer 70-200mm vr1.

You can get deals on this lens if you try, I got mine for around $500, which was a steal, but vie seen others go for 800 or less.

 

[Markw]

Id LOVE to find an AF-s 80-200/2.8 for around $500! I paid that for my 80-200/2.8D. About the Sigma, I've seen wonderful examples taken with it, and I'm sure it will live up to your standards. You will also get HSM/II, which is super nice to have as the torque on the 80-200/2.8D is quite noisy when it first engages. I'd look for the DxO charts for both, compare them, and choose from there if image quality is what you're looking for. Anything other than sharpness can be adjusted in PP (or in camera settings, really)..but I can't see anything really being an issue with either. Obviously, the 80-200/2.8 will be worth more in 10 years, or 30 years, or 70 years because it will last that long, but it's really just a personal choice if that extra money will be worth it, or if you would just need another month or so of savings for whatever magnificent lens the come out with next to replace the 70-200s.

I own the 80-200/2.8D and I love it. The picture quality is immaculate and I really don't have anything to complain about besides the weight, but that's only because it is of such high quality (and fully metal). It's really a personal choice. Sigma also offers a 70-200/2.8 HSM OS I believe. I don't know the price point on this, but I'm sure it is quite promising as well. If the 70-200/2.8 HSM OS has as good picture quality as the 80-200/2.8D (It probably comes negligably close), I would sacrifice the extra $200 in 20 years for the HSM and OS today.

Mark