what to decide..

<p>I need your opinion on what to decide<br>

Nikon AF-S 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR or<br>

Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 II APO EX DG MACRO HSM</p>

<p>You will get better advice if you mention:<br /><br />1) What camera you're using<br />2) What sort of subject matter you shoot<br />3) What other lens(es) you use</p>

<p>1 vote for Sigma. </p>

<p>I vote for nikon only </p>

<p>Both are good but I would say depends on your usage, do you need the extra length of the 70-300 or do you need the speed of the 2.8, a case of either or.</p>

<p>The answers depends on the what do you have plan for the lens. ie.: If you shoot a lot of sporting event indoor, the 70-200 f2.8 zoom is what you want. F5.6 of the 70-300 is not going to cut it, VR or no VR. If you going to carry your camera to Disneyland or spend time with kids hours at a time at the zoo, that extra 12 ounce plus the weight of an additional 1.4X teleconverter makes a different. If you plan to add more lens down the road, a 70-200/2.8 fits well for a completed lens system. On the other hand, if you don't plan to spend too much on photography, 70-300 give you more focal length per dollars. Good luck, shopping is fun or never easy :-) </p>

<p>I would call the Sigma 70-200/2.8 a zoom designed for indoor pictures such as weddings and indoor sports. The Nikon AF-S 70-300VR is designed for outdoor family events, outdoor sports, and wildlife shots in good light. I have the Nikon 70-300 and find it to be a great zoom lens. I have a daughter who plays volleyball and I would love to have the any brand of the 70-200 to use for her sport, but I cannot afford to have both.</p>

<p>Answer - It depends....... If you require 300mm focal length then get the Nikon zoom and avoid the Sigma plus a TC.</p>

<p><strong>BUT</strong> - If you are happy to have 200mm of focal length then I can highly recommend the Sigma, having used it regularly for 24+ months, it's focus was fast, accurate and it was deadly sharp on my D200 / D300 from f/4 onwards and quite acceptable at f/2.8.</p>

<p>I was gifted a Nikkor 70-200mm VR (lucky me) otherwise I'd still be happily shooting with the Sigma 70-200mm. I used to hold the opinion that the use of a TC on this particular Sigma zoom produced acceptable images but after experience with f/4 primes and Nikon TC's I no longer recommend using this Sigma with any TC......</p>

<p>Can't give you any recommendation because I have no idea what you will be using it for. If you photo in low light, the 70-300mm is the wrong lens. If you need longer range or lighter weight, the 70-200mm is the wrong lens. The lenses are different and designed for different situations. No idea what your situations normally are.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>As many have mentioned, the two choices listed are very different lenses.</p>

<p>The 70-300 is a slow/variable VR telephoto lens, which's more ideal for light weight travel/landscape/outdoor photography (it's pretty much unusable for low light photography of moving subjects); while the Sigma is faster lens, which's better for action, low light, or subject isolation/DOF control. But it's not a Nikkor and it lacks VR. </p>

<p>The Sigma's helical system is opposite to Nikon's. Some people don't care though.</p>

<p>Thanks for your opinion! <br /> Otherwise the equipment I have D300, sigma18-50 f2.8, nikkor 35 f1.8 and 85 f1.8 .. I need a zoom lens in situations where it is dark and I need speed..</p>

<p>The better-suited of the two is then the 70-200mm</p>

<p>If you are going to be shooting moving subjects in low light you need the 70-200 f/2.8. If your subjects are not moving you could use either lens. I advise that you handle both lenses. The 70-200 f/2.8 is a big heavy lens. A high quality 1.4 or 2x converter doesn't add much weight, but they're not cheap.</p>