where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
does anyone know/has anybody heard of any rumors if a new sigma 70-200 2.8 for nikon would be released sometime soon??? possibly w/ OS??? b/c im looking into buying the current one but its backordered on B&H/adorama so i dont want to get the current one if a new ones coming out
thx
The new sigma is backordered? Sigma just re designed their f/2.8 70-200 a year or two ago so I doubt they would update it again.
go for tamron, 70-200/2.8 from sigma is really bad lens, in case of IQ and reliability - I had one for 6 months and sold it. However, if You decide to go for sigma anyway, than get it from a retailer with good return policy.
i had the tamron but returned it b/c of problems w/ the AF (tried getting another one/same problem) and i decided to go w/ the sigma b/c of the faster AF
Adamz: what problems did you note w/ the sigma???
from what I gather, Tamron is great but AF will ususally crap out over time. . .Sigma doesn't have AF issues, but IQ isn't as great. . .
makes me shudder to think I'll have to spend nearly $2400 to get a quality 70-200 VR!!
korethegenius said:
Adamz: what problems did you note w/ the sigma???
This is second-hand from my cousin who owns it, but he complains about ghosting, flare, and sharpness (or lack thereof).
shivaswrath said:
from what I gather, Tamron is great but AF will ususally crap out over time. . .Sigma doesn't have AF issues, but IQ isn't as great. . .
Actually, my experience with my tamron 70-200 is that the AF started out a bit crippled—slow, sometimes hunts a bit in low light as if the motor can't make fine enough adjustments to nail the focus. It still works in those conditions as long as you've got continuous AF set and you keep your eye on the in-focus indicator, but it's annoying. For portraits I actually think it's an amazing bargain because the IQ on my copy is great.
adamz said:
go for tamron, 70-200/2.8 from sigma is really bad lens, in case of IQ and reliability - I had one for 6 months and sold it. However, if You decide to go for sigma anyway, than get it from a retailer with good return policy.
That is for sure, there have been so many problems with this Sigma lens, I though about it, but I went for the Nikon in the end, we all seek great IQ, actually the Tamron delivers also, but a bit slow for sports
Pete
Just a thought but why don't you go for the old Nikon VR lens? the IQ is great and it's cheaper than the VRII. I would think the regular VR lens is as good, if not better than the Sigma or Tamron.
noxin said:
Just a thought but why don't you go for the old Nikon VR lens? the IQ is great and it's cheaper than the VRII. I would think the regular VR lens is as good, if not better than the Sigma or Tamron.
The old lens on DX is by far a better lens, but also more expensive, I like mine
Pete
noxin said:
Just a thought but why don't you go for the old Nikon VR lens? the IQ is great and it's cheaper than the VRII. I would think the regular VR lens is as good, if not better than the Sigma or Tamron.
You're right, Noxin. It seems like some people think all the old ones clouded up with envy when the VRII version was released. Even the VR version was out of my price range when I needed my 70-200, but I'm planning on getting it someday. But first a 24-70. And after those a 14-24. Sweet daydreams.
korethegenius said:
Adamz: what problems did you note w/ the sigma???
it was so inconsistent lens, one pictures were great, once they had a bf and once ff - and all in the same series; after just only couple of days of use the aperture control broke and I could only shoot wide open, which in case of my Nikon gear is ok but this lens is way to soft on 2.8, and needed to be closed at least to 5.6 to get sharpness.
if You can afford the Nikon VRI version of 70-200 than go for it, it's really sharp even with TC"s
@Adamz: since when did the Sigma have worse quality than the tamron??? Sigma has really pulled their act together in the past year or so, and after trying out the 70-200 myself (albeit on a d60 at the time) it had no real faults when shot wide open, while recording to a RAW file.
But if it was me who was in this position again, I'd buy the 80-200mm AF. For just a bit more, and even sometimes the same used (as the Sigma) you could get real pro quality Nikkor glass.
JMCS said:
@Adamz: since when did the Sigma have worse quality than the tamron??? Sigma has really pulled their act together in the past year or so, and after trying out the 70-200 myself (albeit on a d60 at the time) it had no real faults when shot wide open, while recording to a RAW file.
well, I say sigma's QC is probably the worst one out of the major lens companies, maybe You got a really good lens and I didn't
in the last 3 years I was using 3 different sigma lenses: 1 was a total mistake (70-200/2.8), 1 was ok (nothing special, but was playing with it a little bit to compare with the nikon version: 18-200 OS - one of my friends has the sigma and another one has nikon) and the third one is outstanding - 10-20mm
as for tamron lenses, I've never had any problems with them - was using some back in the analog times
adamz said:
well, I say sigma's QC is probably the worst one out of the major lens companies, maybe You got a really good lens and I didn't
in the last 3 years I was using 3 different sigma lenses: 1 was a total mistake (70-200/2.8), 1 was ok (nothing special, but was playing with it a little bit to compare with the nikon version: 18-200 OS - one of my friends has the sigma and another one has nikon) and the third one is outstanding - 10-20mmas for tamron lenses, I've never had any problems with them - was using some back in the analog times
Quite possibly, but there was one time that left a bad taste in my mouth about tamron. Maybe I got a really bad lens, but my first 28-75 wouldn't stop down. I returned it, and got another. (Which wasn't all too good, either. Very sticky zooming action, that sounded like it was grinding something.)
I completely believe, and know, that Sigma has a very questionable history in terms of QC. But to tamron's credit, they do offer one of the longest warranties in the industry. I've just had 2/2 lenses that I've purchased from them be duds.
Yes its pretty hard to beat the Nikkor 70-200mm VR I. Like most of my lenses I was able to pick up a good used sample after trying 7 different ones in various shops. I know the price has dropped with the new refreshed VR II. I'd try to avoid the 3rd party lenses if its possible. If you can wait and save an extra $500-$600 you won't be sorry for going with the Nikkor glass I can assure you.
maybe the QC is some how connected to places where both of the companies sell their products, I got all my tamron gear in europe and the "working" sigma's were both from B&H while the non-working one I got locally
anyway, if You want to be sure about the quality go for Nikon :)
I say save up for Nikkors. Third party glass will cost you more $$$ with all the problems (image quality, bad samples, etc.) then if you just get a Nikon from the beginning. The only time I take a chance with third party glass is if they offer a particular lens that Nikon does not.
I've been burned by sigma too many times to recommend them even though I personally still have and use some of their lenses.
NikoDoby said:
I say save up for Nikkors. Third party glass will cost you more $$$ with all the problems (image quality, bad samples, etc.) then if you just get a Nikon from the beginning. The only time I take a chance with third party glass is if they offer a particular lens that Nikon does not.I've been burned by sigma too many times to recommend them even though I personally still have and use some of their lenses.
I see more overall issues with Sigma than Nikon lenses, but some of their primes can be OK
Pete
But at least they have long warranties, not like the 1 year form them cannons
I contacted Sigma. And they told me that the lens will be released in May.
That's good news seriypshick, I was wondering too when the announced lenses would be released.
Did they also tell you when their new 85mm 1.4 will be released? I think that one is very interesting! But it's announced in February and still not released...
You must log in to post.
