Discussion in 'Nikon' started by blake_wallen, Oct 21, 2003.
Please help is this as good as the Nikon 80-200 or 70-200 f2.8?
I have one, and I love it, but obviously given the choice I'd get either of the Nikon AF-S lenses. Obviously the price is the main selling point, and I got mine used for $400 (the 80-200 AF-S sells used for around $1000, and the 70-200 for $1500 or so) There are two drawbacks, in my mind:
1) Images appear to have less contrast than with 80-200 f/2.8D (limited experience with either AF-S versions), although they do appear to be sharp (enough).
2) The Sigma HSM function doesn't work exactly like AF-S. With AF-S lenses in continuous servo focus mode, as soon as you manually override, it stops AF until you press the shutter release halfway again. With HSM, it's doesn't quite work as well, as the camera continues to try to focus after manual adjustment (and therefore ruin your manual focus job). This can be overridden by using the AE-L/AF-L button on some cameras, but for example on an F5 that button only exists in the horizontal shooting layout, and I usually shoot verticals.
The evidence for the second drawback comes from varying degrees of usage with the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8, Sigma 120-300 f/2.8, Nikon 70-200 f/2.8, and Nikon 28-70 f/2.8--some in-store and others extensively. If anyone else can corroborate with their experience that would be great.
Spencer do you shoot film or digital? would you say that at f2.8 the image is still sharp or soft. i have the tamron 28-105 f2.8 and can not use the 2.8 because the image is way to soft.
Asking a sigma question in a nikon forum? My advice is to by the Sigma I use one all the time its focus is fast enough to shoot drag boats and the images are fine. I'm expecting heaps of poor build, not pro responses but I use it and its fine. Save the extra $'s and buy the sigma.
I use Sigma 500mm f/4.5 HSM EX exclusively. I agree with Spencer in Sigma's HSM mechanism and contrast. I have tried Sigma 28-70/2.8 after I bought this 500mm lens. I'm still very very happy with my sigma 500mm prime. But I didn't like sigma zoom at all. It was less contrasty and 'dull' I have no experience with Sigma 70-200 though. I would rather go for Nikon ED which is allmost same price as Sigma. Sigma has the advantage of HSM which really fast. All my flying bird shots are taken with this lens.
The website of Taka Anzai.
It has a very comprehensive view of the Sigma zoom & some Nikkors.
www.photozone.de; www.photodo.com; www.photographyreview.com
These are three places you can find an overwhelming number of some-qualified, some-unqualified responses concerning these lenses.
FWIW, I use the Sigma you refer to (it's too long to type out!!!!) and am very impressed with its sharpness, color, contrast, speed and build. It's a good lens. While I haven't used the Nikon, my primary qualification in offering an opinion is my ability to judge image quality: I shoot various lenses and formats (primes, zooms, 35, digital, 6x7). The images from this Sigma are very good.
As far as being "as good" as the Nikon, the only shortcomings I'm aware of are (i) that focusing continues on the Sigma when you attempt to manually override it (my Nikon bodies (and Fuji S2) have AE/AF lock buttons so it's not a big deal) and (ii) no image stabilization (VR).
The only caveat (you don't mention buying new or used) is that with some older third-party lenses, their chip may require replacing in order to work properly with some of the newer bodies (F80 and up, in my experience). I bought this 70-200 lens soon after they came out (4 or 5 years ago???) so I did have to send mine in to Sigma (Gentec, in Canada) two years ago. The chip was replaced and the lens was returned quickly. I've had no further problems. I didn't experience this problem with my Sigma 500 f/4.5 EX HSM AF-D, by the way. I also use a number of Nikon lenses, FWIW.
I was happy with the optical quality but the build quality was very crappy and as noted, there is no full time manual override like on the nikon lenses. No focus lock buttons either.
Separate names with a comma.