A&P Sigma 70-200 or Nikon 80-200?

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by ericande, Mar 17, 2008.

  1. ericande

    ericande Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2007
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes Received:
    0
    Which lens between the two? The Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 is around $800, the Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 is around $900, I haven't shot with either yet. Sigma is an HSM so supposedly focuses better/faster/quieter. Nikon doesn't have that, it's not quite as wide and slightly more expensive but it is a Nikon.

    Thoughts? Experience?
     
  2. Girth

    Girth ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Messages:
    71,398
    Likes Received:
    107
    Location:
    Houston
    is this the nikon w/ the VR?
     
  3. ericande

    ericande Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2007
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes Received:
    0
    w/o, the one with is the 70-200 VR. It's closer to $1600.
     
  4. Meat Popsicle

    Meat Popsicle What's that smell? OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2002
    Messages:
    121,895
    Likes Received:
    175
    Location:
    The Middle
  5. Girth

    Girth ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Messages:
    71,398
    Likes Received:
    107
    Location:
    Houston
    there's another nikon lens w/ VR in the same range. I have the 70-200 VR and its worth every penny.
     
  6. Meat Popsicle

    Meat Popsicle What's that smell? OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2002
    Messages:
    121,895
    Likes Received:
    175
    Location:
    The Middle
    70-300 VR and it's not the same league as the 80-200 and its variants
     
  7. ok_computer

    ok_computer OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2005
    Messages:
    15,615
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB, Canada
    No there's not. Not a comparable one anyway
     
  8. redna

    redna New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    2,614
    Likes Received:
    0
    You can find a good Nikkor 80-200 for around 650 used.

    I just sold mine for 650.. check nikoncafe.com (have to have 30 posts and be there a month before using the FS forum)
     
  9. ericande

    ericande Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2007
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes Received:
    0
    If I could find one for 650 that would be excellent. I would hardly lose anything when i sold it in a year or so for a 70-200VR.
     
  10. Meat Popsicle

    Meat Popsicle What's that smell? OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2002
    Messages:
    121,895
    Likes Received:
    175
    Location:
    The Middle
  11. GregFarz78

    GregFarz78 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Messages:
    64,128
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Philly, PA
    The sigma is nice and quiet and focuses fast, pretty sharp too my only complaint was no IS :hs: but you really can't find that for that price range. The nikon is a nikon though it probably holds its value better.
     
  12. ftslogger

    ftslogger OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2002
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    CLT
    I bought the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 HSM MACRO, and I love it. However, the Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 AF-S is the better choice. Be careful, there are 3 variants of the 80-200 f/2.8. The Sigma is HSM, which is Sigmas version of AF-S. It focuses very quickly, almost instant on my D300.
    Here is the breakdown on the Nikkor 80-200 variations.

    [​IMG]
    80-200 f/2.8 (Push Pull Zoom)

    [​IMG]
    80-200 f/2.8 D (Gear driven, slower focusing) This is the most common variant of this lens. It is kinda loud when focusing, but it offers excellent results.

    [​IMG]
    80-200 f/2.8 D AF-S This is the most desirable, and most expensive (around 1K used, but superior. Faster focus, and better build.) The 70-200 AF-S VR replaced this lens.
     
  13. ericande

    ericande Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2007
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes Received:
    0
  14. ericande

    ericande Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2007
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes Received:
    0
    Awesome man, this is helpful, thanks! Are they all pretty much the same image quality?
     
  15. ftslogger

    ftslogger OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2002
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    CLT
    The AF-S has a slight advantage. I have used the D version...It won't focus on a D40 or D40x, because the camera motor drives the focus. I have used it briefly and it produces great results.

    I have not ordered from KEH, but I do know they are conservative on their grading most of the times. So don't be afraid to look a the BGN graded lenses. Everyone I know that has bought from them has been pleased. The ultimate lens in this range is the Nikkon 70-200 VR. It is awesome, the bokeh is soo smooth. I am eventually going to sell my Siggy and pickup the Nikkor. I think the 70-200 VR is due for a revision soon, rather I hope.
     
  16. ericande

    ericande Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2007
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes Received:
    0
    I do want the 70-200VR but I've also heard guesses that it will be revised with a year. Plus the $600-$1000 difference in price is pretty significant. I started road racing motorcycles this year and my camera budget is kinda lacking as a result... stupid, expensive hobbies.
     
  17. ftslogger

    ftslogger OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2002
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    CLT
    Get the 80-200 AF-S and you can save for the 70-200 VR...I kinda wish I went down that road....

    Nikkors really hold the value better than the Sigmas. :wtc:
     

Share This Page