Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Lens Advice: Nikkor Or Sigma? 2 Lenses Or 1?  
User currently offlineYOWza From Canada, joined Jul 2005, 4900 posts, RR: 15
Posted (5 years 3 months 20 hours ago) and read 3699 times:

After falling in love with my Dad's D90 I took the plunge and got myself one. The bought the kit with the AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-105mm f3.5-5.6 G ED VR lens. So far I'm still loving it and am getting some "decent" shots, both av and non-av.

I'm looking to get something with a little more range but don't feeling like sacrificing a kidney to get it. So should I:

a) get the Nikkor 70-300 AF with no VR? It would mean carrying two lenses and no VR.
b) get the Sigma 70-300 AF with VR. Two lenses but cheaper than Nikkor and and with VR
c) get the Sigma 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 DG. One lens, lots of flexibility but I've some bad things about the 300 end

I'm leaning towards B but I would very much appreciate any and all of your input with regards to shortcomings, reliability, softness etc.

Cheers,
Yash


12A whenever possible.
6 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (5 years 3 months 19 hours ago) and read 3689 times:

Sigma is a great value but once your skill increases you will outgrow the lens and crave better results. I am of the opinion of spending more money the first time because you will have the lens longer and get much better shots over a longer period of time. VR is overrated. I sold my 400VR and got a prime and still have my 200 2.8 that if you practice you can get crisp shots with a monopd or handheld.

I would not buy anything but Nikkor equipment for my Nikon body. In your case the 300 VR would make more sense.


User currently offlineYOWza From Canada, joined Jul 2005, 4900 posts, RR: 15
Reply 2, posted (5 years 3 months 19 hours ago) and read 3687 times:



Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 1):
I would not buy anything but Nikkor equipment for my Nikon body. In your case the 300 VR would make more sense.

Thanks for your input! My Dad is of a similar sentiment but I thought he was just that way because of his life long allegiance to Nikon/Nikkor.

YOWza



12A whenever possible.
User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 28
Reply 3, posted (5 years 3 months 18 hours ago) and read 3680 times:



Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 1):
I would not buy anything but Nikkor equipment for my Nikon body

Nor would I (except possibly Zeiss).



Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlineAKE0404AR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2535 posts, RR: 46
Reply 4, posted (5 years 3 months 17 hours ago) and read 3674 times:

If you search older threads where similar questions were posed, the replies are pretty much the same.

From my own experience I would do the following:

Buy once, that is the key! It might be more expensive in the first place but you won't regret it. Your skills will improve and you'll get the hang of it sooner or later. You will outgrow your current equipment in very little time.....

Vasco


User currently offlineJosuek6 From Costa Rica, joined Oct 2006, 12 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (5 years 3 months 15 hours ago) and read 3654 times:

I own a 70-300 VR. Couldn't be happier. I tested a 70-300 VR version of a friend before I got mine, have to say that it wasn't that sharp on the 200mm-300mm but still gave it a chance and bought a new 70-300 VR.

When the lens arrived the first thing I noticed was the sharpness it had in the 200mm-300mm range, even at f/5.6. Guess I got quite a good copy of it, as I've heard, there are some quite sharp models of the 70-300 VR model out there.

I trully recommend you getting a 70-300 VR, you will not regret. Have to say that sometimes in bad weather it is quite difficult to shoot at f/5.6, but it is this or spending quite some $ for a 70-200 f/2.8 which I hope I can get soon!

J.


User currently offlineCpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4879 posts, RR: 37
Reply 6, posted (5 years 3 months 13 hours ago) and read 3641 times:



Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 1):
I would not buy anything but Nikkor equipment for my Nikon body. In your case the 300 VR would make more sense.

Same here. I don't own anything but Nikkor lenses and Nikon accessories

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 1):
VR is overrated.

Not in very dark conditions it isn't. It's very useful on larger, long range lenses (especially at 500mm or more). I didn't start using VR lenses, so when I got my first one I immediately noticed the difference.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Lens Ask :canon 70-200 Or Sigma 70-200 posted Wed May 5 2004 18:28:00 by Gust
Canon L Lens 100-400mm Or Sigma 50-500mm? posted Thu Dec 12 2002 07:05:15 by Tsentsan
Sigma Lens Advice posted Mon Jun 8 2009 11:22:39 by Misterdsdan
What's Best For My Money: Nikkor 70-300 Or 80-400? posted Wed Jan 21 2009 13:32:33 by FLY2HMO
Sigma Or Canon 70-200mm? posted Thu Nov 27 2008 18:20:09 by EMA747
Nikkor 24-120VR Or 24-85 F/2.8 posted Mon Aug 6 2007 05:00:13 by Aseem
Pre-Screening Advice - Salvagable Or Not? posted Wed Jul 26 2006 14:28:00 by Holl3411
Dslr Advice: 350D Or 20D? posted Sun May 7 2006 21:04:55 by AC773
Sigma Or Canon 70-200 F2.8? posted Thu Feb 2 2006 18:25:30 by Morvious
Spotting Bali Advice; Go Or Not To Go? posted Fri Dec 9 2005 12:41:39 by DRAIGONAIR