Sigma 70-200 f2.8 Sport HSM Nikon mount

[thequintessentialman]

Anyone found reviews comparing it to the Nikon, some BIFs, or other action shots. From the reviews and pics I've seen it seems to be a pretty sharp lens, I'm just wondering how quickly and accurately the AF acquires and locks on to a target. All the reviews treat it as just a portrait lens and it causes me to wonder why.

[mike_halliwell]

Looks like no-one has!

 

I know quite a few horse event shooters, and non of them has got one yet. But they are looking at it, especially compared to the price of the latest

AF-S 70-200/2.8 E FL ED VR

 

If it's anything like a grown up 50-100mm 1.8, it will be fast, have fast AF, be sharp and equally as good as the Nikon equivalent, not that Nikon has a 50-100mm 1.8 equivalent!

[Andrew Garrard]

I understand it's fairly new, so it's probably a matter of time. I guess it's more competing with the Tamron, of which some have expressed some AF speed concern (IIRC). The Nikkor is very good, but I did feel the dent in my wallet; I put it in the category of "if I'm going to have spent a lot of money on a 70-200 f/2.8, I may as well at least not regret failing to step up to the more expensive model", but other than price the differences between the Tamron and Nikkor are fairly small.

 

Surely it's a bit short for BIFs, though? I've used my 70-200 for tracking a cheetah, but generally I assume 200mm is a bit short for most wildlife, and borderline for a lot of sports. It's a classic walk-around portrait choice, though. I've just used my Nikkor for a load of sports photos, but since the sport in question was tiddlywinks (fast subject acquisition surprisingly important, tracking not so much), I doubt that would help you. Horses, if you can get near, may be the exception.

[mike_halliwell]

The magic number for horses is 135mm (on FX)

 

If you go through a big folder with Exposure Plot, it's by far the most common focal length I use. Just to prove it to myself I did an event with the Sigma 135mm Art. You have to be a bit nifty with the footwork but it was true....;)

 

I guess 200mm 'becomes' 300mm on DX, which would work for near by Pelicans floating past.

 

tiddlywinks

I often wonder if there will ever be a 'colour tracking' abit like Eye Tracking. You show the camera the colour and say focus on that....or maybe for BIF, focus on whatever isn't blue...:D *

 

*I know it wouldn't work in the UK, but it might in Florida..;)

 

Off Topic. Have you seen the vids on YouTube with the fully auto tracking paintball miniguns?, just like the Sentry Guns in Aliens. You can program them very simply NOT to shoot certain camo patterns or shoot only HiViz vest wearers etc!

[Andrew Garrard]

FWIW, I track the eye of the player (as much as some people's bushy eyebrows and the angle of someone leaning over a table allows). I think I've tried tracking a wink in flight, but it's almost impossible even to trigger the shutter at the right time, never mind tracking focus - winks in flight last a bit less long than birds in flight. I've not actually given the D850 a go at it, though. Generally, birds in flight look like birds, whereas tiddlywinks in flight look like a weirdly levitating plastic rectangle, so it's a lot of effort for the outcome.

 

You free tip on how to shoot tiddlywinks for the month...

[thequintessentialman]

OK, maybe BIF was not the best example but before I got the Sigma 150\600 Sport, a Nikon 80\200 AFS was all I had for BIF or anything else far off and moving. As good as Nikon glass is, as an amateur it's just getting difficult to justify Nikon pricing with some of the third parties producing such quality equipment at a much lower price. If my living depended on it, I would get the Nikon hands down (may still depending on how well the Sigma compares). I was a Nikon snob for years and would not consider third party lens but rolled the dice on the Sigma Sport 150\600 and have been pleasantly surprised. Made it much easier to gamble on the Art 135 (again, no regrets).

 

So FWIW, what I've read on the siggy 70\200 looked really good on sharpness, I was just waiting on reviews of its target acquisition, lock, and fire capability.

[mike_halliwell]

Lenstip have reviewed it very recently.

 

https://www.lenstip.com/index.html?test=obiektywu&test_ob=559

 

A tad slow, but accurate seems to be the summary, with a note saying you can of course 'speed up' AF after connecting to the Sigma USB Dock thingy.... maybe to the cost of accuracy, which I guess is always going to a natural compromise.

 

Art 135 (again, no regrets).

I second that thought....:cool:

 

If you can pony up the cash, the 40mm is sharper over a wider range!

[thequintessentialman]

Hmmm, looks like my decision may have just gotten easier. Nikon has some deep discounts on the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8E FL ED VR (and other glass and bodies.) Unless I'm confusing things, this lens is second to none in its class. A little over my budget but I can probably justify the extra to cover the distance between this and the Sigma. Last time I looked, this Nikon was close to $3K. Kind of curious (concerned) though, historically it's been a little unusual for Nikon to offer such discounts on flagship items except when offering a newer LaG model, maybe it's just a different game now...

[thequintessentialman]

The search is over, the $650 discount Nikon has on the FL brought it close enough to budget I just went with it... thanks guys for your comments.

 

:)