70-200 for D700?

[Davi]

Apologies if a much asked question, iPhone won't let me search today. Thinking of an F2.8 70-200 for the D700, so far looked at the Nikkor and both Sigma - one with stabilisation, one without.

Price range difference is 'considerable' so looking for some users opinions. Is the sigma OS worth the extra ~£350 over non-stabilised? Is the Nikkor image quality really worth an extra £1000?!!

[Simpo Two]

How badly do you need a stabilised lens, and how badly do you need the extra 'quality' of the Nikkor? Something else to look for is any tendency to vignette on the FF sensor.

[andy-xr]

I didnt find enough differences between the 70-200 II and my existing 70-300 (the £400'ish one).

Speed and IQ was lower on the 300, but not enough for me to be wanting to throw cash at the 70-200 for what I do. It's an ace lens, I've played with one a lot, I just couldnt justify it

[Davi]

I simply don't know yet Simpo as I've never used either

Basically since being made redundant I've had so many requests for photographs to be done at churches, and my longest lens for the '700 is 70mm so want something with a bit more reach!

[JamieOSullivan]

i have the sigma 70-200 non OS.
Must say i find it fantastic. Use it for weddings and i must say it is great!

[mattdaniels]

I've not used both so can't comment on that.

I do have a D700 with both the 70-200 and the 70-300. The 70-200 is outstanding. I'd sell my 70-300 tomorrow.

As for image stabilisation - if you do a lot of handheld shots, you will need it. The D700 plus 70-200 is quite a heavy combo.

Also a handy feature on the Nikon is the ability to switch the autofocus to "min 5m" which allows it to focus even more quickly than it does if you are shooting stuff that's at least 5m away from you. Not sure if the Sigma has this feature.

Edited by mattdaniels on Saturday 30th April 12:57

[Beardy10]

If you can afford the Nikon VR II go for it....you have a fantastic camera and they will make a great combination. Anything less (including the VRI) will be a compromise on the D700. Lenses like the 70-200 F2.8 VR II are an investment and will be part of your kit for much longer than a camera body. I bought one a few months ago to use with my D7000 and absolutely love it....it focuses so quickly (I would imagine quicker than the Sigma which is something to consider) and it's super sharp.

[slothmeister]

I've recently puchased the non OS Sigma version aswell, using it on a D7000. Awesome lens in the couple of times ive used it. Check my Flickr account for some recent motorsport pics i used it for.

Clicky

[ian in lancs]

I have the Nikon vr1 lens and d700/300s and it's fantastic so if the vr2 is better go for it! Also have the 70-300 nikkor and thats great too!

[dxbtiger]

Have used a friends 70-200 2.8 os sigma on my d90 body to take photos of some mates playing football.

Effing heavy was my main comment, wish I'd had a monopod!

Hard to tell how it performed, I thought they were playing on a full size pitch and it was a smaller one so it was a bit OTT.

Ended up mixing between 18-105 kit lens and 50mm 1.8

[Notstated]

Another way to go is the Nikkor 80-200/f2.8, which still has excellent optics, although no VR, but is considerably cheaper than the 70-200 Nikkor. I bought a slightly battered copy for under £400 (separate rings for focus and zoom, but an older, usually cheaper pushpull version is also available). As stated above, they're heavy lenses, I have an old, lighter 70-210/D Nikkor that I sometimes take travelling, but the 80-200 (and 70-200 Nikkor is probably the same) takes glorious crisp shots that make the sore shoulder worthwhile.

[Cybertronian]

I have the Sigma 70-200 OS f/2.8, though for Canon, and it is a stunning piece of glass. I tested it side by side with the Canon equivalent and whilst Canon's was sharper across the frame at f/2.8, this didn't justify twice the cost for me and the Sigma was good enough.

It is a heavy beast, weighing more than my 7D body. I was shooting a few boxing matches last night and I feel like the hunchback of Notre Dame today! The stabilisation is also very good, floating around 3.5 stops.

I don't think you'd be disappointed with the Sigma, especially for the price and what you get.

[omohat]

Beardy10 said:

If you can afford the Nikon VR II go for it....you have a fantastic camera and they will make a great combination. Anything less (including the VRI) will be a compromise on the D700. Lenses like the 70-200 F2.8 VR II are an investment and will be part of your kit for much longer than a camera body. I bought one a few months ago to use with my D7000 and absolutely love it....it focuses so quickly (I would imagine quicker than the Sigma which is something to consider) and it's super sharp.

What Beardy said. I bought the 70-200 VRII for my D700 and it is a great lens. However, if you're looking at the Sigma's then I would highly recommend the OS version. Image stabilisation makes it a much more useful lens, especially given the weight.

[Davi]

balanced all the thoughts offered up and went into the shop to do a side by side also... one Sigma 70-200 OS ordered!