Tammy/sigma 70-200

[luckyorange]

Erm 850. Mint condition

oh! okok, grats! haha

 

[Fudgecakes]

oh! okok, grats! haha

How much did u get it for?

 

[Fudgecakes]

Bro have u tried the lens in low light? How was the hand-hold ability at 200mm?

In low light it's hunt free though the focus is abit off. Hand holding at 200 is kinda shaky. Would require high shutter speed. Even at 1/125 it was still shaky. but I would be using it on a monopod and during broad daylight so no problem there.

 

[luckyorange]

How much did u get it for?

Erm mine 700 only.

that time was helping a friend to find 1 at bns also haha. (found it already)

 

[Fudgecakes]

Erm mine 700 only.

that time was helping a friend to find 1 at bns also haha. (found it already)

Haha ah well. what's bought is bought. K time to save for a d7k. imma go to Nepal in June and I'll haul back some pictures to share k imma close this thread. Nights all

 

[Fudgecakes]

Feel free to pm me if anything

 

[p3l3r]

Just got sigma 70-200 os ver.
Very nice. Its compareable to nikon 70-200vr2 ( well the vr2 is better) but maybe on par to the vr1.
For its price with os. Its worthed.

Im using it on my d7k

 

[zurichdo]

Not sure if this has been asked before, but I noticed more Nikon users as compared to Canon user for Sigma lenses locally, is there a reason why? Especially for this lens.....

 

[Fudgecakes]

Not sure if this has been asked before, but I noticed more Nikon users as compared to Canon user for Sigma lenses locally, is there a reason why? Especially for this lens.....

Idk. Maybe more Nikon users just like this range. The canon version I actually much more expensive than the vr2 version.

 

[daredevil123]

Not sure if this has been asked before, but I noticed more Nikon users as compared to Canon user for Sigma lenses locally, is there a reason why? Especially for this lens.....

Canon offers the 70-200/4 IS at a much lower price, and is very sharp to boot. That is why people without the budget will usually go for the 70-200/4 instead, rather than going for a Tammy or Siggy 2.8.

 

[daredevil123]

Just got sigma 70-200 os ver.
Very nice. Its compareable to nikon 70-200vr2 ( well the vr2 is better) but maybe on par to the vr1.
For its price with os. Its worthed.

Im using it on my d7k

SOrry I disagree. It is not comparable to the vr2. The v2 blows the sigma os away.

It is comparable to the vr1 though but the vr1 is much better performing when it comes to focus breathing.

 

[Cowseye]

SOrry I disagree. It is not comparable to the vr2. The v2 blows the sigma os away.

It is comparable to the vr1 though but the vr1 is much better performing when it comes to focus breathing.

That's y I held back my purchase for a 70-200mm lenses for so long.... Haha

 

[gnesgnoy]

So is it worth to get a used Nikon 70-200 VR1 or a new Sigma 70-200? I understand Sigma is lighter and hunts in low light as compared with Nikon. Thanks.

 

[Cowseye]

So is it worth to get a used Nikon 70-200 VR1 or a new Sigma 70-200? I understand Sigma is lighter and hunts in low light as compared with Nikon. Thanks.

Is it lighter?? I tot they are abt the same..

 

[daredevil123]

So is it worth to get a used Nikon 70-200 VR1 or a new Sigma 70-200? I understand Sigma is lighter and hunts in low light as compared with Nikon. Thanks.

If given the choice with no budget constraints, I will get the VR1 over the Sigma OS. The biggest thing being resale value besides performance differences.

 

[DigitalCamera]

Idk. Maybe more Nikon users just like this range. The canon version I actually much more expensive than the vr2 version.

You mean the Canon 70-200? No, the Mk II is much more expensive.

Canon offers the 70-200/4 IS at a much lower price, and is very sharp to boot. That is why people without the budget will usually go for the 70-200/4 instead, rather than going for a Tammy or Siggy 2.8.

How does the Sigma 2.8 OS fair against the Canon f4 IS at similar settings? They are about the same price (grey set), and the Canon will have higher resale value. But 2.8 will be good since I occasionally shoot in low light. Any differences in the IQ and sharpness?

 

[wrx_sti_22b]

How does the Sigma 2.8 OS fair against the Canon f4 IS at similar settings? They are about the same price (grey set), and the Canon will have higher resale value. But 2.8 will be good since I occasionally shoot in low light. Any differences in the IQ and sharpness?

Sigma is not as sharp at f2.8. It only sharpen up at f4 onwards.

 

[wrx_sti_22b]

Is it lighter?? I tot they are abt the same..

The Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 OS is about 1.4kg+.

 

[DigitalCamera]

Sigma is not as sharp at f2.8. It only sharpen up at f4 onwards.

Yeah, so I heard. But I want to know which lens is sharper at, say f/5.6?

 

[daredevil123]

Yeah, so I heard. But I want to know which lens is sharper at, say f/5.6?

So far from what I hear, the Canon seems to be the one with better IQ. When you get a F2.8 70-200 zoom, you really intend to shoot it at F2.8. That is why you pay more, and carry a much heavier lens. Canon 70-200/4 is much smaller and lighter.