 Chris Gentile |
Sigma 70-200 lens question I've been looking at purchasing the Sigma f2.8 70-200 and have two related questios. First, does anyone have any knowledge about the quality of this lens? It's about half the price of the new Nikon 70-200 f2.8 VR, is it also half the quality, or is the price hike with the Nikon partially related to buying a named brand??? Second, the lens also comes with a macro option. I'm tempted by that, but I want to be sure that the macro option doesn't somehow compromise the quality of the lens. Anyone know if the two are comparable? Thanks. -Chris
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jon Close |
Lens tests I've seen rate the Sigma marginally less sharp than the Nikon, but close enough that it would be virtually impossible to distinguish actual photos taken with either. It has HSM (Hyper Sonic Motor AF), which is virtually the same as Nikon's AF-S (Silent Wave AF). The lower price for the Sigma is because it does not have VR (Vibration Reduction), and to overcome Nikon-brand loyalty. The new MACRO model allows focus as close as 1m (~39"). It is as sharp or sharper than the non-MACRO version. Sigma's non-MACRO 70-200 f/2.8 can only focus down to 1.8m (~70"). The Nikon focuses to 1.5m (~59") in AF, and 1.4m (~55") in manual focus.
|
|
|
|
||
|
anonymous |
I was also looking at the Sigma's lens, but opted to purchase the 28-135mm Canon lens. Main reason was cause the Canon had image stabilizer and the second cause it was Canon, and I knew I wouldn't have any issues with it.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||