A&P Thinking of buying a Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 HSM...

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by tenplanescrashing, Nov 10, 2009.

  1. tenplanescrashing

    tenplanescrashing Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    9,287
    Likes Received:
    0
    Guy on another board is selling his for $600 shipped and i'm highly considering it. This is the newest version which he purchased off Adorama a couple months ago.

    I'd love to finally replace the Nikon 70-300 ED f/4-5.6 that has been good, but not great (non-VR, non-G). I just lack a decent telephoto zoom lens, which I feel has hindered my abilities to pick up some side jobs (had to turn down several because all I have is decent wide angle lenses).

    My only downside is I don't shoot very much anymore...but don't know if this is one of the reasons why. Fucking decisions...
     
  2. derekOT

    derekOT New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    Messages:
    1,086
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Calgary, AB
    you didn't really ask a question, but my opinion on sigma's 70-200 is that it is excellent

    sharp wide open, AF takes abit of time to lock on but once it is on it is quick, solid and durable build

    I use the first canon version and I really like it

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Nov 10, 2009
  3. Girth

    Girth ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Messages:
    71,398
    Likes Received:
    107
    Location:
    Houston
    friend bought one a couple of years ago, didn't like it. Sold it and bought a Nikon 70-200 VR. Its worth the wait, just be patient :)
     
  4. Heinzanova

    Heinzanova OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Messages:
    14,329
    Likes Received:
    30
    Location:
    Singapore, Singapore
    Or buy a 80-200 Nikkor. I really think the Nikon optics can't be beat.
     
  5. derekOT

    derekOT New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    Messages:
    1,086
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Calgary, AB
    they can! by the new nikon 70-200 version 2, that one will be really sick

    especially in the corners on full frame (im too poor for it though)

    I still think that for the money, the sigma should definitely be considered. If you have the cash, by all means go for the nikon 70-200 VR

    If i was swimming in cash id buy a 70-200 f/2.8L IS for my canon
     
  6. tenplanescrashing

    tenplanescrashing Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    9,287
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't have the cash for the nikon. This is the newer version of this lens (HSM) so the focusing shouldn't be as big of a deal.

    I don't think I'll ever have the cash flow for this type of lens and if it wasn't for this side job I'm doing, I probably wouldn't be able to now.
     
  7. Mutombo

    Mutombo New Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Messages:
    5,289
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Do it. If you don't like it, you should be able to get most, if not all of your money back by selling it to someone else.
     
  8. xenon supra

    xenon supra OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    33,675
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    80-200 af-s is the sweet spot between price and quality IMO
     
  9. tenplanescrashing

    tenplanescrashing Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    9,287
    Likes Received:
    0
    I figured as much. I'd prefer the af-s 80-200 nikon but it isn't within my price range and is damn near impossible to find
     
  10. Cicada

    Cicada OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2008
    Messages:
    143,522
    Likes Received:
    789
    Location:
    SoCal
    ive been thinking about going with teh 70-200 f/2.8 non-is canon lens because htey're plentiful -- seems like everyone is selling 'em (probably to get the IS version, though :()

    i shot with the 70-200VR on my D70 a few times and it's a phenomenal lens -- i never got a chance ot shoot with the 80-200 2.8 to compare, though.

    i really like IS/VR, though, as i almost never use a mono/tripod.
     
  11. Nader_D

    Nader_D HAHAHEHHUH ---- POOOHhHhHHCHhh! OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Messages:
    88,288
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ottawa, Canada
    im going to apologize in advance, but

    im lovin this picture :o :o :o :rofl:

    you should contact McDonalds about this picture. seeing how they are are a huge sponsor of the NHL/Hockey in Canada.
     
  12. N_A

    N_A Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Messages:
    271
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    I had 3 of the canon mount and they all back focused a ton. Ended up getting the canon
     
  13. Cicada

    Cicada OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2008
    Messages:
    143,522
    Likes Received:
    789
    Location:
    SoCal
    IS or non-IS?

    im trying to decide. i'd normally use the 70-200 outdoors to shoot sports, so im not too sure if i'd need the IS -- but it's always nice to have in case i find myself needing to use it
     
  14. tenplanescrashing

    tenplanescrashing Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    9,287
    Likes Received:
    0
    People have said the same about the Tamron 28-75 and the 17-50 and having had both of them, never had that issue. With that, I hope I continue being lucky then. :x:
     
  15. derekOT

    derekOT New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    Messages:
    1,086
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Calgary, AB
    HAHAHA thread hijacker :bowdown:

    Thanks dude!
     
  16. N_A

    N_A Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Messages:
    271
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    I tried pretty much all of them, Before the sigma I had the Canon f4 non IS, which was flawless, then had the 3 sigmas that all backfocused, then I tried the canon 2.8 IS and figured I didn't need the IS on a 2.8 so I tried the non iS and after using it for a bit found it too big for what I do, I hike a lot and lugging around a 300lb lens sucks so I ended up getting the f4 IS

    it was a hard choice but oh well.
     
  17. pantheR

    pantheR New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,684
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    oh this lens looks pretty nice, need to see some comparisons to the canon 70-200 f/2.8
     
  18. N_A

    N_A Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Messages:
    271
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    there are a few comparison sites....I checked it all out when I went to buy it and from the looks of it the sigma looked good. I would have been happy with it if I got a good copy, but after 3 tries I gave up. Now I know people that got sharp ones right out of the gate and love them
     
  19. GlobeGuy

    GlobeGuy New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,974
    Likes Received:
    0
    I bought a used Nikon 80-200 2.8 (2 ring) for $650. You can probably find the canon version for just as cheap, if you look hard enough.
     
  20. Cicada

    Cicada OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2008
    Messages:
    143,522
    Likes Received:
    789
    Location:
    SoCal
    as far aas ive seen the canon 70-200 2.8 NON-IS goes for roughly 950-1100, IS version goes for $1400-1650

    70-200 f/4 goes for $400-600, and the IS goes for $900-1050.

    this is on craigslist :o did a lot of searching when i was looking for mine :p
     
  21. tenplanescrashing

    tenplanescrashing Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    9,287
    Likes Received:
    0
    sweet! lens came in today, get to do some better playing with it later tonight. (no pics, i'm still at work)

    I like the HSM, but it does focus a little slower than I expected. Probably because of the range and size, but it's still worlds better than my 70-300. Now I get to sell the Nikon...
     
  22. Cicada

    Cicada OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2008
    Messages:
    143,522
    Likes Received:
    789
    Location:
    SoCal
    :bigok:
     
  23. tenplanescrashing

    tenplanescrashing Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    9,287
    Likes Received:
    0
    I haven't gone out and messed around with it yet, so this is the only shot so far. The focusing with it is a lot more difficult than I thought it was going to be.

    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page