Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Thu Dec 18, 2014 9:48 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 7:51 am 
which lens is better?
watch this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lr6lfvNNLNg


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:07 am 
The Nikon is better, because the optics are superior and it has a better AF system, the Nikon also features VR (Vibration Reduction=Image Stabilser). But then the Nikon is twice the price. I could go into more detail, but those are the basic areas which the Nikon is better in, it is certainly a much better lens overall.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:10 am 
Nikon 70 200 are really superb on the DX Format. But the FX format some complain that produces vignette & soft corners.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:27 am 
Nikon 70-200mm price is 2X Sigma, so it should be more expensive.
It is expensive because of the VR, supply and demand. Nikon 70-200mm is optimized for DX, so it will have some vignetting in full frame camera.

On the other hand, Sigma 70-200m HSM is cheap, no VR but delivers very good image quality especially in full frame camera. The AF is very fast.

Depends on your budget and your need, Sigma 70-200mm HSM might be good enough for you.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 12:37 pm 
The latest issue of the British Journal of Photography has just reviewed this lens. Have a read of it at http://www.bjp-online.com/public/showPa ... age=866117

Quote:
Conclusions

The Sigma is no more expensive than the Tamron despite the HSM focusing versus a plain micromotor. Build quality feels heavier, an extra 200g in a 10mm shorter design. Coming with a rugged tripod mount (1/2 inch thread only), which is removable and doubles as a small handgrip, the Sigma also has a good deep lens hood and a padded case with strap.

It would be hard to say it's much inferior to the branded equivalents. Optically, it doesn't have the same wide open central resolution as a Nikon or Canon at long distance and the long end of the zoom, but it can be better at close focus distances.

The HSM focusing seems designed to leave Canon owners - those most used to this tech-nology - happy with an equally fast, silent equivalent.

Weak points are that it loses resolution and illumination towards the edges of full frame at 120-200mm when focused beyond portrait distances, and f/8 is needed for critical landscape work with detail corner to corner. Within the 70-120mm range, it performs well at f/4.

Used on a 24 million pixel full-frame DSLR, the overall mix of results from a couple of hundred shots confirmed the Sigma 70-200mm is up to the task. Surprisingly few lenses are.


In short, the reviewer seemed happy with its performance on the Nikon D3X. Given that BJP is a reputable professional's magazine, I'm tempted to trust that conclusion.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 3:50 pm 
its actually better imho


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 4:32 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 11:08 pm
Posts: 7972
Location: Germany
Comparable reviews can be found here and there.

Conclusion: You get, what you pay for in higher sharpness and image stabilization... [again!]
Whether this is worth the extra money for you, only you can decide.

_________________
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews, My Pictures, My Photography Blog
D800+assorted lenses


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 4:56 pm 
The problem I've found with Photozone reviews is that they're fairly limited. They take photos of MTF charts, and that's about it. No comment on focus speeds, object tracking, no real life tests and it's all really academic.

I'd rather trust reviews where they did more than just shoot test charts. No offense to Klaus of course, but that's my opinion.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2009 6:00 am 
podgeorge wrote:
The Nikon is better, because the optics are superior and it has a better AF system, the Nikon also features VR (Vibration Reduction=Image Stabilser). But then the Nikon is twice the price. I could go into more detail, but those are the basic areas which the Nikon is better in, it is certainly a much better lens overall.


+1 :D


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group