# used Nikon 80-200 af-s vs sigma 70-200 hsm II



## Destin (Sep 22, 2010)

I have $900 to spend on a lens in the range. My initial plan was to buy the sigma from my local shop and be done with it. Many folks give it great reviews, about half seem to have trouble with it's focus calibration. 

Reading reviews on the Nikon 80-200 af-s, it has overall better reviews but apparently there are alot of bad copies of it out there too, some with focus issues like the sigma

To get it used for $900, I'd have to buy on ebay. Not too big a fear for me, as I use ebay alot. The bigger problem I see is that if i end up with a bad copy of the nikon, I don't have a warranty to cover it. 

I'll be using the lens mainly for sports, and some portraits if it makes any difference.


----------



## Derrel (Sep 22, 2010)

You could always pass it along on eBay. I would much,much rather have the Nikon than the Sigma, for a number of reasons. Resale value, color balance, build quality, optical quality, performance, all being better with the Nikkor than the Sigma.


----------



## ghache (Sep 22, 2010)

I am currently shopping for that lens and i think i am going for the sigma. i heard that the focus problem is really limited to a small amount and that the focus is really fast.


----------



## Hooligan Dan (Sep 22, 2010)

I've been using the nikon 80-200 for a few years and it is a great lens for the price, but it's not without its problems. It focuses fairly slow. Not slow enough that you can't use it for high speed sports, but you will miss more shots than you would with a newer lens. It's very noisy. It's not a good lens to use in a quiet environment, especially when it's searching. And not the most important thing, but a little annoying, it doesn't have manual override on the focus. The m/a switch is fragile and can break pretty easily. The hood also doesn't secure very well. It regularly falls off if I'm walking with the camera hanging off my shoulder.


----------



## Derrel (Sep 22, 2010)

Dan,
   The OP is asking about the 80-200 AF-S...it does have full-time manual focus override...it has very fast focus...it has almost totally silent focusing...I think you have an 80-200 AF-D model...the OP's asking about the relatively much rarer 80-200 AF-S that was produced right before the 70-200 VR.


----------



## Hooligan Dan (Sep 22, 2010)

I do have the AF-D. I completely read over that. My bad.


----------



## djacobox372 (Sep 22, 2010)

I own the 80-200 af-s and it's an amazing lens. If you can find one for $900, then I'd say grab it! They typically sell for around $1100.

It's rather odd that you would bring up good/bad copies of the lens.  As that is what is usually pinned on the sigma brand.


----------



## CNCO (Sep 22, 2010)

Spend a bit more and get the 70-200 f2.8


----------



## DC-Photog (Sep 22, 2010)

Always go with the Nikon. I have a 15 year old 80-200 (non af-s) that I've passed along to my assistant. I cannot tell the difference between prints made with it and my newer Nikon 70-200.


----------



## Destin (Sep 22, 2010)

CNCO said:


> Spend a bit more and get the 70-200 f2.8



I would love to, but I'm a starving college student. It would take me three months to save up the extra $700 I would need to get a used 70-200 VR. I need a new camera body soon too, so I need to budget accordingly.


----------



## Sachphotography (Sep 22, 2010)

I would go with a brand New Sigma for 799 from a good dealer such as BH or Adorama.
Buying used can be good or bad. I have had both good and bad experiences. Though the bad lens I got was promptly refunded due to paypal's wonderful service...lol  Anywho My point is that if you get a bad copy of a new lens from BH or AD you can easily get it taken care of. If you get a bad copy on Ebay you either suck it up and ship to Nikon or you lie and resell it on ebay for a loss. I would hope your integrity woul not lean towards the latter.My point is if your Money is tight go for the Guarantee. Another great option is to buy used from a reputable dealer such as KEH.... Adorama has a good selection of used as well as BH but KEH has the best customer service I have dealt with to date. Keh will gladly take back and refund for a bad lens. They tend to often under rate gear and 9 out of 10 times you will get a lens rated as an "OK" copy when it is in spectacular shape.

Check them out....

Nikon Autofocus 80-200 F2.8 D MACRO ED WITH TRIPOD MOUNT (77) WITH HOOD, CAPS, 35MM SLR AUTO FOCUS ZOOM TELEPHOTO LENS - KEH.com

Here is a great deal

Used Sigma Zoom Telephoto 70-200mm f/2.8 EX APO IF HSM 566306 -

Only $529 with HSM/\/\/\/\/\/\

1986G Nikon 80-200 2.8 Ed Af-d W/bracket *77

These are just a variety of options. I would highly recommend Somewhere that will take a lens back if it is not to your liking. Ebay is not a good choice for that.

That Sigma is a steal at that price lol I would buy it but I just bought a 180 f/2.8 and a 105 f/ 2.8 darn......I could have got that lens for cheaper!!!!


----------



## epp_b (Sep 22, 2010)

If you can stretch that budget a couple hundred dollars, go for a brand new 80-200 AF-D (not AF-S) far sooner than I would the Sigma.


----------



## Sachphotography (Sep 22, 2010)

epp_b said:


> If you can stretch that budget a couple hundred dollars, go for a brand new 80-200 AF-D (not AF-S) far sooner than I would the Sigma.



Also depends on the Camera he has.... he may have to have AFS or HSM but yeah the Nikon would be a good choice.


----------



## Destin (Sep 23, 2010)

Sachphotography said:


> epp_b said:
> 
> 
> > If you can stretch that budget a couple hundred dollars, go for a brand new 80-200 AF-D (not AF-S) far sooner than I would the Sigma.
> ...



Correct, I'm using a d40 so I need the lens to have a built in motor. My next move after this is to get a d7000 though, hoping to have it by Christmas time...


----------



## Ejazzle (Sep 23, 2010)

With out at doubt go for the Af-s. If you can find it hop on it. The af-d doesnt hold a candle to the AF-s.

The risk of one of those sigmas sucking is not worth it. The 80-200 af-s will be a better lens then any of those sigmas. I love my Af-s its a tank and you only ever read good things about them. That fucusing problem you read about was probably about the Af-d and someone over looked that Af-s part in the reviews section, just like dan just did.


----------



## Sachphotography (Sep 23, 2010)

for use with a D40 I would go with the sigma. 

1. Price
2. You wont notice any quality issues with a D40
3. use the money saved to put in saving towards a D7000
4. well.......... read 1 2 and 3


----------



## shaunly (Sep 23, 2010)

I'd go with the Nikon. Quality you can trust. I picked up my 80-200 AF-D used and also notice it's slight miss focus, but after I use fine tune AF, it is tack sharp through the zoom range now. Nikon 80-200 is very sharp even at f2.8 and it's really built ultra tough. Can't say enough how great this lens is.


----------



## Sachphotography (Sep 23, 2010)

shaunly said:


> I'd go with the Nikon. Quality you can trust. I picked up my 80-200 AF-D used and also notice it's slight miss focus, but after I use fine tune AF, it is tack sharp through the zoom range now. Nikon 80-200 is very sharp even at f2.8 and it's really built ultra tough. Can't say enough how great this lens is.




Im sire it would be great on your D700 but he has a D40 and cannot use AFD has to be AFS or HSM  ect....


----------



## Destin (Sep 24, 2010)

Sachphotography said:


> shaunly said:
> 
> 
> > I'd go with the Nikon. Quality you can trust. I picked up my 80-200 AF-D used and also notice it's slight miss focus, but after I use fine tune AF, it is tack sharp through the zoom range now. Nikon 80-200 is very sharp even at f2.8 and it's really built ultra tough. Can't say enough how great this lens is.
> ...




Not only that, but the d40 doesn't offer focus correction. The lens has to be dead on.


----------



## Ejazzle (Sep 24, 2010)

OP, Dont skimp on glass. 

Even if he does have a d40 now. Buying this Nikon Af-s now and saving a little longer for the D7000 is still a smarter decision than buying the sigma and the d7000 a little bit sooner.


----------



## Destin (Sep 24, 2010)

I REALLY want to go with the nikon. I really do. But if I go with it and there is a problem, then I'm SOL. No warranty to back it up. 

With the sigma I at least have that much, and the sigma has pretty good reviews. 

I honestly think the sigma is the better option right now, just because it comes with peace of mind. Plus after a week or so if I don't like it, I have the option to return it to my local camera store. Not so with the nikon off of ebay.....


----------



## Sachphotography (Sep 24, 2010)

Destin said:


> I REALLY want to go with the nikon. I really do. But if I go with it and there is a problem, then I'm SOL. No warranty to back it up.
> 
> With the sigma I at least have that much, and the sigma has pretty good reviews.
> 
> I honestly think the sigma is the better option right now, just because it comes with peace of mind. Plus after a week or so if I don't like it, I have the option to return it to my local camera store. Not so with the nikon off of ebay.....



I would say if your leaning on the sigma go with the one mentioned above...good price and BH is a great dealer to work with.


----------



## Destin (Sep 24, 2010)

Sachphotography said:


> Destin said:
> 
> 
> > I REALLY want to go with the nikon. I really do. But if I go with it and there is a problem, then I'm SOL. No warranty to back it up.
> ...



Don't get the 4 year warranty then though


----------

