Sigma 50-200 OS vs Nikon 55-200 Vr Need help deciding between the Sigma 50-200 OS or the Nikon 55-200 Vr for my Nikon D5000.Would appreciate any feedback, I understandthat the construction of the Sigma is better then that of the Nikon, but that the Nikon lens is a bit sharper, specially at longer focal lengths.Again, any help would be appreciated since I would be ordering the lens in a few days.Thanks in advance,George Sigma 50-200 OS vs Nikon 55-200 Vr Need help deciding between the Sigma 50-200 OS or the Nikon 55-200 Vr for my Nikon D5000.Would appreciate any feedback, I understandthat the... » Read More Sigma 50-200 OS vs Nikon 55-200 Vr Need help deciding between the Sigma 50-200 OS or the Nikon 55-200 Vr for my Nikon D5000.Would appreciate any feedback, I understandthat the construction of the Sigma is better then that of the Nikon, but that the Nikon lens is a bit sharper, specially at longer focal lengths.Again, any help would be appreciated since I would be ordering the lens in a few days.Thanks in advance,George « Show Less
75252
Thank you for taking the time to answer my question, I ended up buying the Sigma lens and I agree with you when you say that is a great value for the price.So far I'm very happy with this lens, I have used it in both daylight and night time (with external flash) and the results have been excellent with my D5000, the OS is great and focusing is very fast indeed.Again, thank's !George
75253
http://www.flickr.com/groups/d40slr/discuss/72157602509321717/?search=sigma+vs.+nikoni know it's been a while but that may give some insight.i have the sigma version and it's great value for the price paid.
963337
Outperforms the 70-300 VR in that is can zoom back to 28mm. That is why it is twice the price. It does not produce better images between 70 and 300mm. I would chose the 70-300 for the longest shots, and the 28-300 for shorter. Both lenses are as professional as the person using them, do not be impressed by reviewers waving wads of bills at you, because like a Violin, a Camera/lens is only as good as the user!
990745
Congrats on the D5000 (and both great lenses you have). Be sure and get that 35mm down the road, believe me it will probably be the best 200$ you'll ever spend if you do any shooting indoors. I have tons of other lenses (including a 50mm f/1.4) so I held off for a while on getting the 35mm f/1.8, once I did finally get it I was kicking myself for not getting it sooner, it's that good. Happy shooting.
1790370
I owned the 70-300VR for a year and sold it. I bought the 55-200VR and still have it after a year.For me, an amateur photographer of general life pictures, I did not like the size and weight of the 70-300. I ended up not using it much and therefore decided to sell it. However, the pictures were beautiful. In it's favor are the bokeh and contrast. Otherwise, I find the little brother 55-200 more suitable for me hands down. I prefer the range, light weight, low price, and overall picture quality was more than good enough. If I were to do primarily bugs, birds type, then the 70-300 would be more suited. I owned the 70-300VR for a year and sold it. I bought the 55-200VR and still have it after a year.For me, an amateur photographer of general life pictures, I did not like the size and weight of the 70-300. I ended up not using it much and therefore decided to sell it. However, the pictures were beautiful. In it's favor are the bokeh and contrast. Otherwise, I find the little brother 55-200 more suitable for me hands down. I prefer the range, light weight, low price, and overall picture quality was more than good enough. If I were to do primarily bugs, birds type, then the 70-300... » Read More I owned the 70-300VR for a year and sold it. I bought the 55-200VR and still have it after a year.For me, an amateur photographer of general life pictures, I did not like the size and weight of the 70-300. I ended up not using it much and therefore decided to sell it. However, the pictures were beautiful. In it's favor are the bokeh and contrast. Otherwise, I find the little brother 55-200 more suitable for me hands down. I prefer the range, light weight, low price, and overall picture quality was more than good enough. If I were to do primarily bugs, birds type, then the 70-300 would be more suited. « Show Less
108984
The contempporary version of sigma 17-70 has an upgraded array of optics, and is lighter compared to the initial version of Sigma´s 17-70, and more compatible with newer camera models ie canon60D. This is the reason beneath the price difference. I am quite happy with my choice. Lens performance is great, image sharpness is outstanding!
1211085
sigma recently came out with 17-70 version which has a C mark on it. its a good walk around woiyth f2.8 to 4. IS or OS is a good thing and its a personal decision. I have always preferred them as sometimes you forget to hold your breath for that magic moment which may not be as crisp otherwise.
194933
Bill, there are a few variables... Do you plan to go to a FX sensor in the future (D700, D3)? Do you plan on hand-holding or will you be using a mono/tripod? Are you someone that must have the latest and greatest things? Personally I'm going for the VR II, I shoot a D90 now but want to have room to move to a FX camera without worrying about vignetting and edge sharpness. Plus after looking at some of the review pictures that people have posted, especially the side by side shots, I think the VR II is worth the extra $500
2123501
If you hear a click before and after focus and release the shutter in your camera is totally normal....switch the VR off and you will notice that the click disappears...not big deal is totally normal...actually i have a few lenses that click in some way when the VR or OS or VC is ON....for me the results are that really matters...however..without the Vr if the noise of "click" is there then you should call nikon or if you can return for an exchange....good luck...I have thus lens and i made an extensive research about it...plus, I have another lenses like the 105 sigma OS macro and tamron 70-300 VC that some way make some "click" when the VC,OS, or VR is on...
392882
I think you should be comparing this camera to Nikon's D70s, not the D50. I just bought the D70s after much comparison shopping with the Canon XT. I don't think you can go wrong either way. The deciding factor for me was the superior lens in the Nikon kit vs. the Canon which everyone agrees is practically a throw-away. So if you do decide on the Canon, at least buy the body only and upgrade your lens.
1418843
You did the right thing with the D40. See the Lew Rockwell site.I have had mine for several months, and the more I learn about it,the better I like it.I recommend you buy the 55-200 VR lens to go with it.Unbelievable.
21673
D40 has a faster flash sync speed (1/500) than the D60 (1/200). Fast flash sync speed is essential if you are taking fast action (think car race) pictures with the flash. Besides that D60 has better features - Active D-Lighting, Dust control mechanism and more megapixels. 6 MP is plenty for most of us, but the dust reduction mechanism on D60 might be useful if you are constantly changing lenses (like you will be doing). Active D-lighting might be useful in some circumstances as well. To me the biggest difference is the included VR kit lens in D60. Although some will question the usefulness of VR at such a short focal length, I think it makes a difference. D40 comes with a non-VR kit lens and is NOT sold as body-only in the USA. If you say the D40 kit comes with a 18-55 VR lens, then you are either looking at a gray market or a refurbished camera. Given D90, a mid level camera with excellent reviews, also has the same flash sync speed as D60, I'd get a D60 over a D40 if the price difference isn't much. Hope this helps.
137014
There is one available from OneCall for $1,899.00, but I don't think I can trust it, and extra $200 isn't really worth the risk of getting a lens that may not have Nikon's warranty on it. Sigh... should I just go get the 105mm macro VR or the 70-200mm VR II?
2103072
I have both. Since getting the Sigma, the nikon is never on my camera. The Sigma is much better and very flexible in my opinion. However, you should get the USB dock for the sigma, so you can update the lens firmware. Not every camera needs it, but in many people's experience it makes all the difference. You probably won't need to do more than just update the latest lens firmware. I love the new sigma ART lenses. Killer sharp, great color rendition. Very nice bokeh. Reasonable price.
840152
Thank you guys, really appreciate you help. I was in confused state in selecting sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 or tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 macro, but after a week study i have selected this sigma 50-150mm which is exactly in my budget. Once again thank you guys.
1803406
I had a D40 before the D60, the D60 is MUCH better, just my personal thoughts 1-Dust, if you live in a dusty environment is a BIG ONE 2-Active D-light, Say good bye to underexposed photos, the camera produces very consistent results, not so with the D40 3-Expeed produced lower noise at higher ISO 4-THE VR Lens is SOOO much worth it, my pictures are always sharp I considered the D80, but... 1-No Active D-light "a big one" 2-more focus points yes, but you can do anything with 3 if you use them well 3-the D80 has a motor, but Nikon will be updating most of this primes to AFS this year, I tried the camera motor its slowwww 4-I was planing to get the D80+50mm 1.4 lens for low light, got the sigma 30mm 1.4 its a much better lens to keep on the camera IMHO 5-Expeed processing on the D60 seems to produce more saturated/vivid pictures vs.. D80 I shoot RAW/convert with capture NX, tried all the options, capture NX is slow and ugly, but it gives you the BEST picture period.
811136
I have a Nikon mount of this lens and I also have the Nikon's top of the line 70-200 VRII lens and the images produced by my copy of this lens are as sharp as the Nikons 70-200. I liked my copy of this Tamron lens better than the Nikon 24-70mm lens. I would say give it a shot and if you get a good copy of this lens it will be a keeper.
1790368
I have the non-VR version of both, and I personally prefer the 70-300. I got the gray market version of the 70-300 for $110...that's a deal right there. You can get that AND the 55-200mm VR and come out paying the same as you would for just the 70-300mm VR. Also, the focal range covered (55-200mm = 82.5-300mm) and (70-300=105-450mm) is much greater with the 70-300 on a DX. VR is important, yes, but with my D90 and its battery grip, I don't have much trouble getting sharp shots at 300mm and 200mm at 1/60 with either of them, respectively. The size difference is considerable in your bag as well. The 70-300 is rather large. I have the non-VR version of both, and I personally prefer the 70-300. I got the gray market version of the 70-300 for $110...that's a deal right there. You can get that AND the 55-200mm VR and come out paying the same as you would for just the 70-300mm VR. Also, the focal range covered (55-200mm = 82.5-300mm) and (70-300=105-450mm) is much greater with the 70-300 on a DX. VR is important, yes, but with my D90 and its battery grip, I don't have much trouble getting sharp shots at 300mm and 200mm at 1/60 with either of them, respectively. The size difference is considerable... » Read More I have the non-VR version of both, and I personally prefer the 70-300. I got the gray market version of the 70-300 for $110...that's a deal right there. You can get that AND the 55-200mm VR and come out paying the same as you would for just the 70-300mm VR. Also, the focal range covered (55-200mm = 82.5-300mm) and (70-300=105-450mm) is much greater with the 70-300 on a DX. VR is important, yes, but with my D90 and its battery grip, I don't have much trouble getting sharp shots at 300mm and 200mm at 1/60 with either of them, respectively. The size difference is considerable in your bag as well. The 70-300 is rather large. « Show Less