Your input is appreciated

[C. Brian Kerr]

As you can see in my signature line, I use a Nikon D7100 and Sigma lenses. I am considering driving to NY to B&H photo and seeing how much both of my lenses are worth as trade in and get the Sigma 150-600mm contemporary

 

[TreeofLifeStairs]

Is there no way to find out how much they're worth with out the drive?

 

[Derrel]

You could see what KEH.com might pay, and get a quote over the 'net. A 70-200/2.8 and a 50/1.4 are both pretty good tools, good building blocks. I see the 150-600 as a slow but very long tele-zoom that will be best during the bright sunny months of the year, and in marine areas, where there is a LOT of sunlight and a lot of fill light, such as over lakes, big rivers, the ocean, and so on. My input is that you'd be getting rid of two "shooters" for a "limited use" tool, the 150-600,

My feeling also is that third-party lenses that were bought new, at full retail, are bad candidates for trade-ins but decent candidates for person-to-person trade stock. Camera-maker lenses, like Canon or Nikon 70-200/2.8 lenses are more valuable to both dealers, and to regular people in person-to-person trading scenarios; I think honestly that once you buy a third-party lens NEW that what you get out of it by selling it to a dealer is worth less than the lens is as 1) a "shooter" or as 2) trade stock with another photographer.

I have no idea what you payed for the Sigma 70-200/2.8 or if it's the newest of three (is it three versions now?or four?) versions, but if the trade-in value is something dismaying, like say $350-$445, which is what I expect, that's really NOT worth it to you...what you'd lose would not be worth what they would pay you for it at a dealer.

 

[PaulWog]

The Sigma 150-600 Contemporary is really a fun lens. It presents excellent value for the money. I have had mine for a short couple of weeks, and I've gotten a bit of a chance to test it out (a loss in the family + work has kept me from getting a day out with it though). It resolves better detail at 600mm than my old 70-300 VR did at 300mm. I would presume the move might be about 2-3x the detail that your 70-200mm f2.8 can get at 200mm and cropped in to an equivalent scene as the 150-600 at 600mm (I couldn't give an exact number). That, plus some nice optical stabilization, makes for a really satisfying upgrade. I'm also getting better results with a full frame sensor paired with the lens: If something is too far, it resolves the same amount of detail on an equivalent crop compared to a DX sensor. If something is closer (enough to fill the frame -- which is not all that often with wildlife), it resolves more detail than a DX would. If that's confusing, I can explain further (it has to do with how much detail translates through the glass to the sensor, and how many megapixels you really need to utilize any given area of the glass... to put it simply). As Derrel mentioned, it's a slow tele-zoom: That's part of the reason why I chose to move to full frame (it was the last pushing point, and a fair excuse for me to do so). By getting 1.5 to 2 stops of better ISO performance, you really can push the lens a lot further.

With all of that said, I honestly think the lens is really cool, and makes a lot of sense on a D7100 still. There's just so much you can do with it.

That sounds a little drastic selling a nice 70-200 f2.8 lens, and a 50mm 1.4. Are you going full wildlife only? Honestly, it's too bad that there isn't an incremental upgrade choice for wildlife shooting. You end up hitting a threshhold of performance at $1300 or around there, and then you end up jumping up to $8000 or so for something new from there, or maybe $4000+ for something good enough used.

Try Craigslist if you can do it safely. You'll get better money, even if you sell yourself short.

 

[The_Traveler]

Buying on the spot in NYC and taking the lens with you means paying NYC taxes.
Have it shipped.
Unless you are going just to visit B&H, considering the cost of driving, tolls (~$68 RT from Baltimore), parking($30/night) and sleepover, it seems much more convenient and economical to get an approximate quote over the phone, ship them the lenses and get the longer lens by return mail.
I go to NYC a good amount and always take the bus which is more convenient and economical.

 

[DarkShadow]

It was just a matter of time for long bazooka urge kicked in but besides what was said already an 18-140 Nikkor would fill the gap nicely with no overlap or at least an 18-105. Sometimes other then birds it could be real PITA to capture a shot in the frame with out the need to back up way Up from the subject and not always possible. Just something to keep in mind.

 

[C. Brian Kerr]

Thanks everyone. I received a quote from B&H and almost got sick. May just sell the 50mm on my own and look into adding a tele converter. Any thoughts on best ones that will work with my set up?