Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR11 + 2 x TC or Sigma 50-500 OS

RickMezza

RickMezza

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,436
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi, We're going on holiday in South Africa and part of that will be a few days on Safari.
Which lens do you reckon would be best choice between 70-200 2.8 VR (+ 2 x TC) vs Sigma 50-500 OS. We're going to hire one.
Camera is a Nikon D3000

I've thought about the bigger lenses such as Nikon 200-400, but discounted them because it'd be simply too big to lug around (and expensive !) to hire for 2 weeks when we're only going to use it for a few days of those 2 weeks.

Would the 70-200 f2.8 VR with the 2x TC attached still give better optical quality over the Sigma at max zoom (400mm with TC compared to the Sigma at 400mm).

I know the Sigma would have better reach overall, but then the Nikon also has benefit of a max aperture of f2.8 without the TC and the benefit that brings.
:shrug:

Thanks
Rich :)
 
Last edited:
just got a new nikkor 70-200 .... brilliant lens ! far superior than the sigma but depends on what you need it for, with a good \TC it would be a great comination in my opinion
 
i have the 70-200mm vr1 and the 50-500mm os both cracking lenses and no matter how much i love my nikon my fav lens is the sigma as it has such a wide range and the af is fast and quiet and it produces cracking pics from 50-500mm ok it wont beat the 70-200mm from that range but it does 50mm and it does 200mm and up.
just some recent pics.
SJB_4471.jpg

SJB_4516.jpg

fieldfarecrop.jpg

SJB_4333.jpg

SB1_1645-1.jpg

SB1_1637.jpg
 
Last edited:
Thanks to you both for your replies...much appreciated. :)

Scott - have you tried a 1.7 or 2x teleconverter on the nikkor 70-200 and if so, how does it the image quality compare at the top end in comparison with the sigma at the same focal length?

Very nice photos btw :thumbs:

Thanks,
Rich
 
I do not own a 2x TC (yet at least!) but have the 70-200mm 2.8 VR II with the intention of getting the TC later on, but with one caveat; the 2x version 3 III is the one to go for from what I've been told. Again, I considered the Sigma 150-500mm, the 'Bigma' 50-500mm as well, but went for the added cost of the Nikkor with the safeguarded option that if I upgrade to full frame in the future, the Nikkor would still be an amazing lens (albeit at double the cost!)

The only 'issue' is that there is massive demand for the version III 2x TC at the moment, and coupled with limited supply and the recent tragic events in Japan, it may be some time until the UK gets stock (from what I was told at Grays).
 
rick to be honest i have not tried a 2x on the nikon but did on my sigma 70-200mm adn the af speed dropped lots and image quality was no where near as good.
the 70-200mm is slightly faster for af but the sigma is still very quick, i think a 2x on the 70-200mm on a crop will be fine but the 50-500mm will be give more advantages as it gives pritty wide shots and has 500mm.
if you can go try before you decide.
 
Nikon newbie said:
I do not own a 2x TC (yet at least!) but have the 70-200mm 2.8 VR II with the intention of getting the TC later on, but with one caveat; the 2x version 3 III is the one to go for from what I've been told. Again, I considered the Sigma 150-500mm, the 'Bigma' 50-500mm as well, but went for the added cost of the Nikkor with the safeguarded option that if I upgrade to full frame in the future, the Nikkor would still be an amazing lens (albeit at double the cost!)

The only 'issue' is that there is massive demand for the version III 2x TC at the moment, and coupled with limited supply and the recent tragic events in Japan, it may be some time until the UK gets stock (from what I was told at Grays).
Click to expand...
both the sigmas are full frame lenses.
and the 50-500mm os cost £1200 new.
 
scottthehat said:
both the sigmas are full frame lenses.
and the 50-500mm os cost £1200 new.
Click to expand...

I was referring to the 150-500 with regards to cost, but the way I worded it was slightly confusing!! And yes, both are still FX compatible as you say, but I suppose it was the brand-whore in me that said get the Nikon, get the Nikon....
those darned voices in my head! :lol:
 
scottthehat said:
...the 50-500mm os cost £1200 new.
Click to expand...


And weighs the same like for like :lol:

Doesn't get the "bigma" name for nowt - althou it does have a handy carrying tripod handle thou (my bigma did (non os version)) so was handy to carry around...
 
If you want the reach then go for the sigma. I am not a big fan of TC because you add more glass to a lens that could affect the IQ
 
Thanks to all for your feedback. :thumbs:
I think I'm gonna go for the Sigma 50-500 OS because of the extra flexibility it has (range from 50mm to 500mm). We've not been on safari before so don't know what to expect. The Sigma might not have the same quality at 200mm as the Nikon but I guess we're less likely to miss a shot due to it being too close / too far away :bonk:.

Thanks,
Rich :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top