Final decision time!!! Nikon 80-200 f2.8 AF-D or Sigma 70-200 f2.8

N

nictry

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,194
Edit My Images
No
I want to make a decision on the above asap as I am annoying myself with my own indecision!!!!

I have read some pretty great reviews of the Nikon 80-200 and have a chance to pick one up for under £500 (bearing in mind this is not the later AF-S is this a reasonable price?) also my comparison and possible alternative lens is the much newer Sigma 70-200 (Tamron ruled out for slow AF and Nikon cos just too damn expensive)

So what would you do, go for the Nikon as the older but apparantly pin sharp option or spend a few quid more and get the Sigma newer but with perhaps not the best optics in the world!

I would be using this for a bit of wildlife (with a TC possibly) and also for footie and very occasional motorsports

Thanks in advance for any advice/suggestion :thumbs:
 
I've had the Nikon and would chose it over the sigma every time, especially the macro, at £500 you could buy it try it and sell it for around the same price if you decided you'd made the wrong decision( unlikely )

I presume you're talking about the 2 touch nikkor not the older push pull one for £500
 
wack61 said:
I've had the Nikon and would chose it over the sigma every time, especially the macro, at £500 you could buy it try it and sell it for around the same price if you decided you'd made the wrong decision( unlikely )

I presume you're talking about the 2 touch nikkor not the older push pull one for £500
Click to expand...

Yes the two ring version not the older one, this one here http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/80200.htm
 
Any other thoughts before I make my decision tomorrow
 
I'm not knocking the sigma as such, my point is at £500 the nikkor is a good buy, the 2 ring versions seem to be selling for daft money on ebay at the moment £560+ so if the OP buys it, isn't happy with the lens it's a no cost free trial
 
i have the 80-200mm f2.8 and i love it. I never realised how soft some of my other lenses were till i got this lens. As the others have stated you would get your money back if you found it wasnt for you. I paid £480 for mine off ebay and it came with a filter and the hood which i was told does not come with the lens when you buy it.
 
I took this last year with a D300 and a 80-200mm f/2.8 nikkor it hasn't been sharpened at all just resized and was taken wide open at f/2.8
when I saw it on my PC I thought it was very sharp and had really clear colours
DSC_1631-1.jpg
 
I had the Nikon 80-200 AF-D and replaced it with a 70-200 VR, for no other reason than I needed the faster af, optically they are pretty much identical.
 
So from what you are all saying even though this isn't the latest AFS it is worth every penny of £500 (oh and a hood is being thrown in too!!!)?

And as an aside anyone know what tc works well with this lens? I assume a 1.4 rather than a x2 but seems to be mixed info on which ones work with the AFD vs the AFS version of this lens?
 
nictry said:
So from what you are all saying even though this isn't the latest AFS it is worth every penny of £500 (oh and a hood is being thrown in too!!!)?

And as an aside anyone know what tc works well with this lens? I assume a 1.4 rather than a x2 but seems to be mixed info on which ones work with the AFD vs the AFS version of this lens?
Click to expand...

Well worth £500 - I use mine almost every day (and can show you loads of examples if you need more convincing). You can't use a TC with it though.

The 80-200mm AF-S version has been discontinued for a while. So you either get the AF-D or the 70-200mm AF-S - at a much higher price.
 
I stand corrected - I had heard that.
 
wack61 said:
it hasn't been sharpened at all
Click to expand...

you should always sharpen, digital needs it, otherwise your not showing its potential

DSC_1631-1.jpg
 
before the price hikes I was seriously considering the sigma over the Nikon, but since the price hikes the Nikon AFS version is very attractive, i don't know where you are getting the AF-S version from, but for £500. it is an absolute great deal, IQ performance i don't think anyone will argue with you. Sigma HSM II <<<<<< Nikon AFS. but the choice become a bit difficult when you consider AF-D version as they are slightly older and optics wise still great, but the AF can be slow (from Ken), basically you loose a fast motor over screw drives. I had tried to get a AF-D and AF-S especially for ages and ages, not found one around 500 or even near so gave up and settled for a Tamron, which i think has great optics but very slow focus.
 
it's an af-d he's buying for £500
 
Well I've gone and done it and splashed the cash on the 80-200, hopefully I will be a happy bunny when it turns up Wednesday :)
 
wack61 said:
I've had the Nikon and would chose it over the sigma every time, especially the macro, at £500 you could buy it try it and sell it for around the same price if you decided you'd made the wrong decision( unlikely )
Click to expand...

Very nice lens it is as well thanks...........:)

Nearly as sharp as my 180 F2.8.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top