# Sigma 70-200 f2.8 VS Nikon 80-200 f2.8



## Ub3rdoRK (Nov 5, 2009)

So im sure you guys get this a lot...but ive narrowed it down to a nice fast telephoto. I am now deciding to get either lens. I currently have a D90. I know i cant afford to get something with VR because well...its just really expensive. Any photo examples? Ive browsed flickr, amazon, forums etc and not a lot of good examples. Is it really worth saving $200 for a NEW lens where the nikon is about 1000 and the sigma is about $800. Optic differences, bokeh differences etc? My dad always says stay with the camera brand but i just need opinions.

My pros: lighter, cheaper
My cons: heavier, nikon branded, (reviews say more durable due to construction) 
and thats about all i got


----------



## jeff5897 (Nov 5, 2009)

Let's compare the 2 lens by these photos, use D300 camera, same ISO and same focal length, and review them in 100% original size.

I think Sigma is as good as Nikon.

200mm ISO200 Nikon 70-200 + D300 
Flickr Search Engine : Flickr original size search engine.

200mm ISO200 Sigma 70-200 + D300
Flickr Search Engine : Flickr original size search engine.


70mm ISO200 Nikon 70-200 + D300 
Flickr Search Engine : Flickr original size search engine.

70mm ISO200 Sigma 70-200 + D300
Flickr Search Engine : Flickr original size search engine.


----------



## MrLogic (Nov 5, 2009)

Are you talking about the 80-200 f/2.8 AF-*D*, or the 80-200 f/2.8 AF-*S*?


----------



## Ub3rdoRK (Nov 5, 2009)

im sorry i should have clarified that...yes the f2.8D (two ring model)


----------



## itznfb (Nov 5, 2009)

Nikon for sure.


----------



## Wolverinepwnes (Nov 5, 2009)

This is like comparing a honda civic (good car, good built, last a long time) to a Rolls Royce (work of art, amazing built, expensive). the nikon being the Rolls of course!!!


----------



## dhilberg (Nov 5, 2009)

The Nikon of course. By the numbers its optics performs better than the Sigma's, plus it will hold its resale value better. And after reading this thread here, I'd be hard pressed to even consider the Sigma.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 5, 2009)

I looked at KEH.com and 80-200 two rings are from $819 to $889 in fine condition used. There have been several iterations of the Sigma. Did you happen to see the thread from two days ago where a user's Sigma 70-200 broke at the lens mount after around ninety days of ownership? For the additional money, the Nikkor will have significantly better build quality, as well as resale value.

If you buy the Nikon now and use it for a few years, the price will have crept back up little by little,and even with inflation,you'll be able to get what you payed for it back out of it. If you buy the Sigma, you'll have a major depreciation issue,and resale on Siggy's is usually 50 to 65 percent of price payed when the lens was new.


----------



## SlimPaul (Nov 5, 2009)

Wolverinepwnes said:


> This is like comparing a honda civic (good car, good built, last a long time) to a Rolls Royce (work of art, amazing built, expensive). the nikon being the Rolls of course!!!



Now I really like that comparison


----------



## Ub3rdoRK (Nov 5, 2009)

i guess i should have browsed a little more. I have been really leaning to the Nikon which i knew i should stick with my instinct. I've always been weary on alternate brands.


----------



## dhilberg (Nov 5, 2009)

Don't discount the third party brands entirely. There are third party lenses that are excellent: Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 HSM Macro, Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8, Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8, Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6, etc. I think there's an excellent third party macro too, but I don't remember it offhand.

However, with zoom telephotos (especially f/2.8 versions), the best performance is generally OEM.


----------



## benhasajeep (Nov 5, 2009)

I have the 80-200 f/2.8 v2 and have had it for 10+ years.  Thats 10 years of being haulled around in a bag.  On and off tripods / monopods, mounted / dismounted.  Not one single problem.  I take good care of my equipment buy they definately don't get the white glove treatment every time I use them.  It's built like a tank and has lasted like it was.  In my opinion especially after seeing the broken Sigma it was a wise investment choice on my part!!


----------



## PatrickHMS (Nov 6, 2009)

benhasajeep said:


> I have the 80-200 f/2.8 v2 and have had it for 10+ years. Thats 10 years of being haulled around in a bag. On and off tripods / monopods, mounted / dismounted. Not one single problem. I take good care of my equipment buy they definately don't get the white glove treatment every time I use them. It's built like a tank and has lasted like it was. In my opinion especially after seeing the broken Sigma it was a wise investment choice on my part!!


 
What he said...

I have had both Sigma APO 2.8 and the Nikon 2.8

Both are good glass, and both will take good photographs.

But the difference in build quality between the Sigma and the Nikon is night and day, and all you have to do to see that difference is to hold one of each.


----------



## chip (Nov 6, 2009)

I used to own a Nikon  80-200 f/2.8 and it produced great images. The down side is the lack of VR. For a telephoto zoom VR is really useful. Between the two I would pick the Nikon to be safe.


----------



## Antithesis (Nov 6, 2009)

Wolverinepwnes said:


> This is like comparing a honda civic (good car, good built, last a long time) to a Rolls Royce (work of art, amazing built, expensive). the nikon being the Rolls of course!!!



Except in this case, the Rolls is more reliable than the Honda.

Get the Nikon, no question. The Sigma is an ok lens, but always go with Nikon over third party if you can. There are very few exceptions to this.


----------



## jdag (Nov 6, 2009)

Just went through this decision process.  Bought the Sigma because it was about $350 less...returned the Sigma.  Bought the Nikon...LOVE IT!

The Sigma produced nice clear photos.  It focused quickly, and I felt that it had a nice build quality.

But...it froze up my D90 on several occasions, to the point that I had to remove the battery to get the camera operational.  That was a deal-breaker for me, and I was not comfortable getting a 2nd copy and risk any (unlikely) damage to my D90.

These lenses become extensions of the camera body, and I just feel more comfortable with the Nikon.  Oh, and the 80-200 is outstanding!

Side note - I ran a similar poll on a different forum.  The results were roughly 45 Nikon, 3 Sigma.


----------



## Wolverinepwnes (Nov 6, 2009)

U made the right choice, congrats!!!! enjoy it for a life time


----------



## Derrel (Nov 6, 2009)

The folks at Sigma are forced to periodically re-reverse engineer their lenses for full compliance with Nikon's newer bodies. This is something Nikon has been doing for many years, as they continually add little tweaks to their AF and light metering system. Sigma does not get free access to Nikon's API's and technology updates--Sigma reverse engineers its HSM protocol to be as close to Nikon's AF-S protocol as they can get, but Sigma is not Nikon. Sigma offers a fair quality item at a fair price in its EX line, but the ED Nikkor f/2.8 pro lenses have never earned the name SIGnificantMAlfunction.:thumbup:

I just went trough the thread, and I believe it was six guys in a row suggesting that you buy the Nikon instead of the Sigma. Hmmm. Looks like your experience showed why a Sigma is not a Nikkor. Hey--I own a few Sigma lenses,and where they make a product Nikon does NOT make is the only place to buy a Sigma, like the Sigma 180 3.5 Macro, or the Sigma 100-300 f/4 EX. But where Nikon competes head to head in the same category, the choice of a Sigma lens is not always s clear cut as it is in other categories.


----------



## bhop (Nov 8, 2009)

AF-D?  I would choose the Sigma (and I did, with zero regrets).. for my purposes, the focus speed matters.


----------



## Pure (Nov 8, 2009)

D90 + 80-200mm 2.8
Colin Bassett | Sports

The AF is pretty fast.  Not as fast as an AF-S, however I've shot birds and sports and I've been fine.


----------



## ANDS! (Nov 8, 2009)

The Sigma 70-200 HSM is one of Sigma's most highly regarded lenses.  If someone had a compat issue, I would chalk that up to dumb-luck, not a flaw in their design process.  Bang for your buck, the Sigma wins out.  If you're just going off name only - sure find the Nikon.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 8, 2009)

ANDS! said:


> The Sigma 70-200 HSM is one of Sigma's most highly regarded lenses.  If someone had a compat issue, I would chalk that up to dumb-luck, not a flaw in their design process.  Bang for your buck, the Sigma wins out.  If you're just going off name only - sure find the Nikon.



Obviously, you're not familiar with Sigma's years-long, ongoing process and attempts to keep up with Nikon's ever-so-subtle modifications to their autofocusing protocols. Issues with Sigma lenses causing cameras to stop responding are legion; the problem is quite widespread,and has been for eight or nine years at least. Each time Nikon changes its autofocusing protocols significantly enough to cause Sigmas to malfunction, Sigma embarks on a reverse engineering campaign again--and Sigma will re-chip lenses for free. As long as they have parts.

Nobody said it is a "flaw" in Sigma's design process,and it is not "dumb luck" either--Sigma is NOT the manufacturer of Nikon or Canon cameras, and as I stated once above in another post, Sigma is not given free access to the camera makers' technology--Sigma is forced to work from the outside in, re-engineering its products to work. Sigma has had numerous,numerous problems. Do a web search on "re-chipping Sigma lens". Then come back and fill us in, okay? It'll take you all day to read the first ten pages of results.

Oh, and the issue also exists for Canon EOS cameras as well. Check out this thread Sigma won't resolve incompatible lenses - Photo.net Canon EOS Forum


----------



## ANDS! (Nov 8, 2009)

> Obviously



Obviously.



> Issues with Sigma lenses causing cameras to stop responding are legion



You have any evidence beyond anecdotal complaining on internet forums that supports you dismissing the Sigma product out of hand?  Of course you do.  Suggesting that a person shouldn't bother with 3rd party lenses simply because they are 3rd party is about as ridiculous and self-defeating an argument as suggesting someone should go with the camera that offers the most mega-pixels per buck:  it is a tired internet-trope that needs to die already.  Yes, it is dumb luck that someone finds a lens that needs to be rechipped; Nikon does not change its mounting, or optics system THAT MUCH that it requires "legions" of consumners to take to the streets demanding satisfaction.  A vocal minority is still a minority.  

But please, continue in this faulty logic tailspin you've found yourself in.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 8, 2009)

Sorry newbie, but the problem of Sigma lenses refusing to function is evident in THIS very thread--in which a brand new Sigma lens malfunctioned on a new Nikon body. And again, newbie, do some simple Google searching. I've been involved with Nikon SLR photography since the early 1980's and I am *fully* aware of Sigma's quality control and or lack of QC over *decades*. I own four Sigma lenses, two of which do not work quite right on Nikon bodies of "modern" vintage, but which work on "older" Nikon bodies like the N90s because the lenses were made several years before my newest Nikon bodies were made. Nikon=Nikon,and privy to in-house API's. Sigma=outside of Nikon, and forced to reverse-engineer all interfaces.

I would also suggest a course in reading comprehension to help you overcome your knee-jerk defense of Sigma products; I did not suggest that a person not bother with 3rd party lenses--Tamron makes some very fine 3rd party lenses. I happen to *own* several Sigma lenses, and am fully aware, from actual experience, that Sigma is a discount-level lens maker at each level they choose to manufacture.

Again, newbie, it is not mere dumb luck: Nikon continually re-optimizes the AF-S focusing protocol,and Sigma is not informed when that happens. Obviously, you lack experience outside your own; the truth is that re-chipping of Sigma lenses en masse occurs with each significant Nikon update to their *proprietary* focusing and camera control protocols. The facts are out there, and experienced and long-time users like myself occasionally buy  a Sigma lens for the value it represents, such as the Sigma 180 f/3.5 EX Macro or the Sigma 100-300 f/4 EX HSM 3x ratio zoom lens: areas where Nikon has no comparable product. But, sorry newbie, BOTH of those Sigma lenses exhibit erratic AF operation on "new" Nikon digital bodies, but function well on older model bodies. And I know,from decades of experience, exactly WHY that is. I've lived it, not just read about it? You?

Do you work for Sigma? Or just identify very strongly with Sigma lenses?
I own Canon, Nikon,Sigma, Pentax, Vivitar, and Tamron lenses; Tamron makes some flawlessly performing 3rd party lenses using the Nikon AF-D protocol screwdriver focusing, which is what pro Nikon bodies utilize. I have no issue with 3rd party lenses,and own a number of them, but the facts are the facts...and have been for around a decade. I notice the public poll recommended Nikon 23 times, the Sigma 70-200 FOUR times. 23 to 4. Wow.

EDIT: I checked your Flickr pages and see you're a *big* Sigma fan. Again, reading comprehension lessons are in order for you: I did not suggest that Nikon changes "the mounting",as you alleged--but the focusing and or metering API's. I doubt you understand the difference. And by the way, it's not the "mounting", it is called the mount. It's a noun.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 8, 2009)

You asked for it, you got it--these are the most recent Sigma notices FROM SIGMA ITSELF, with URL's. Admission from Sigma itself that its products suffer from incompatibility issues with Canon and Nikon products. Please note--there are dozens more user-generated complaints and issues. The following are OFFICIAL, Sigma admissions of problems. Choke on it.

http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/news/info_080527.ht
Official service notice FROM SIGMA, to Canon users, notifying them that their lenses 120-300 OS and 150-500mm OS:  "When the Canon 40D digital SLR is in AI Servo AF mode, and the APO 120-400mm F4.5-5.6 DG OS HSM for Canon or APO 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM for Canon lenses are attached to the camera with the OS function switched ON, the number of continuous frames per second will decrease.&#8232;&#8232;To overcome this, we will start supplying a free-upgrade service to our customers from today.&#8232;&#8232;We deeply apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused to our customers."

Sigma - News
0/31/2008
Notice to customers using Sigmas EO-ETTL II type flashguns
Sigmas EF-530 DG SUPER EO-ETTL II, EF-530 DG ST EO-ETTL II, EM-140 DG EO-ETTL II, EF-500 DG SUPER EO-ETTL II and EF-500 DG ST EO-ETTL II do not operate roperly with Canon EOS 50D D-SLR camera. To overcome this, we will start supplying a free-upgrade service to our customers today.&#8232;Please notice that this problem occurs with the EOS 50D D-SLR camera only.&#8232;&#8232;We deeply apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused to our customers.&#8232;&#8232;Upgrade will be required to overcome the following problems:
	1.	The Autozoom function does not work properly.
	2.	Exposure is not correct.

Notice to end-users using Sigma&#39;s HSM equipped lens with Nikon D200 camera
Sigma has issued a service notice for the use of their HSM lenses on the new Nikon D200 digital SLR. HSM or HyperSonic Motor lenses use a motor driven by ultrasonic waves to provide a quiet, high-speed autofocus (AF). Due to a firmware bug in these lenses, this function does not operate when the AF operation button on the back of the body of Nikon D200 digital SLR is used. In case the shutter button is used for AF operation, the camera and lens combination works without any problem. Sigma is committed to correct this situation and will start updating firmware of these lenses free of charge today.

From Sigma itself, "To our valued customers,

AF function of our HSM equipped lenses do not operate when "AF operation button" on the back of the body of Nikon "D200" digital SLR camera (recently introduced to the market by Nikon) is used. This problem is caused due to a firmware "bug" of our HSM equipped lenses.

We deeply regret any inconvenience this may cause our customers who own D200 camera and we are committed to making this situation right. In this respect, we will start updating firmware of these lenses free of charge today. 

Please also note that if "shutter button" is used for AF operation of HSM equipped lenses, camera and lens combination works without any problem. 

This problem occurs with *HSM equipped lenses only. Non-HSM models of Sigma lenses function properly with D200 camera. 

Click here for a list of the US Sigma Distributors and Service Centers 
Click here for a list of WorldWide Sigma Distributors and Service Centers 
"

Notice to Nikon D3 owners using Sigma&rsquo;s Nikon fitting lenses - SIGMA CORPORATION
Notice to Nikon D3 owners using Sigmas Nikon fitting lenses
2008.1.21
A limited number of Sigma lenses when used with the new Nikon D3 digital SLR camera will not support the "Auto DX crop" function. To overcome this we will be supplying a free upgrade to our customers. We deeply apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused to our customers.
Sigma Corporation 2008/1/21
List of lenses requiring update for D3 camera
DC lenses (Exclusive for digital SLR cameras with APS-C image sensor)
30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM
Serial Numbers lower than 2054001
10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM
Serial Numbers lower than 2160001
DG lenses(Lenses for 35mm format SLR cameras)
APO 300mm F2.8 EX DG HSM
Serial Numbers lower than 3013701
APO 120-300mm F2.8 EX DG HSM
Serial Numbers lower than 4022401


Upgrade will be required for the following problems
	1.	When the Nikon D3 is in Auto DX crop function and the 30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM or 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM lens is attached, the image area format will not change to DX format automatically.
	2.	When the Nikon D3 is in Auto DX crop function and the APO 300mm F2.8 EX DG HSM or APO 120-300mm F2.8 EX DG HSM lens is attached, the image area format will be changed to DX format, even if the image area format is set to FX format or 5:4.
For further information, please contact your nearest authorized Sigma Service Station.


----------



## chip (Nov 9, 2009)

Antithesis said:


> Get the Nikon, no question. The Sigma is an ok lens, but always go with Nikon over third party if you can. There are very few exceptions to this.



Agree 100%. :thumbup:

Putting a Sigma lens on a Nikon camera is like putting a VW bug engine in a Porsche 911. Why would anybody do that? The lens is critical to producing great images!


----------



## iflynething (Nov 9, 2009)

Look at the 2.8 for Nikons. I love my lens and definitely wouldn't trade it for the Sigma...... ever. 

Note it's really soft at 2.8, which is expected even for a quality lens like this. While this is usual wide open, just think what a Sigma would have? I have heard great reviews of Sigmas and have shot twice with one, but I do not have test images unfortunately.

If I were you, the poll doesn't lie, go with the Nikon and you won't think twice. 

Also, I got my 80-200 from a local Craiglist guy for $600. No obligation to buy it. Met him at a park, shot and completely loved it. Bought it 2 days later after we could meet up. 

Unless there is a huge scratch on a used one, they're not that much different than a new one. If you be patient and look hard....and wait, you WILL find one.

Good luck

~Michael~


----------



## Ub3rdoRK (Nov 10, 2009)

Man I love this forum. It has such great people on it full of knowledge.


----------



## MrLogic (Nov 10, 2009)

iflynething said:


> I got my 80-200 from a local Craiglist guy for $600.
> 
> Note it's really soft at 2.8, which is expected even for a quality lens like this.



This is the AF-D, correct? Some say that the 80-200 AF-S is much sharper wide open.

It would be interesting to see a comparison.


----------



## PatrickHMS (Nov 10, 2009)

chip said:


> Putting a Sigma lens on a Nikon camera is like putting a VW bug engine in a Porsche 911. Why would anybody do that? The lens is critical to producing great images!


 
Back in 1968 we did it the other way around. Had a VW Beetle with a bad motor, so we put a "built" motor from a Porsche 550 Spyder in it.

Out with the old 40hp, in with the new 100hp (est.)

Will never forget the fun we had with cars back in the days...


----------



## JohnnyL (Nov 10, 2009)

buy the best and use it for life


----------



## iflynething (Nov 10, 2009)

MrLogic said:


> iflynething said:
> 
> 
> > I got my 80-200 from a local Craiglist guy for $600.
> ...




Yeah, it would be the AF-D. I would like to see a comparison also. A friend of mine has the AF-S I believe but he isn't very easy to get in touch with

~Michael~


----------



## Smokeyr67 (Jun 28, 2013)

Wolverinepwnes said:


> This is like comparing a honda civic (good car, good built, last a long time) to a Rolls Royce (work of art, amazing built, expensive). the nikon being the Rolls of course!!!



So Nikons break down, are expensive to buy and maintain, while Sigma just keeps on going for 20 hard years:
)


----------



## manicmike (Jun 28, 2013)

Thread started... 				 					*11-05-2009*

just sayin'.


----------



## Gavjenks (Jun 28, 2013)

dhilberg said:


> The Nikon of course. By the numbers its optics performs better than the Sigma's, plus it will hold its resale value better. And after reading this thread here, I'd be hard pressed to even consider the Sigma.



This is ridiculous to scare people about. The lens broke after 90 days, and all EX lenses (of which this is one) have THREE YEAR warranties on them. Plus, the guy kept up on his thread until awhile after he sent his lens in to sigma, and then never responded on the thread again, which almost certainly means "Oh they fixed it and honored my warranty, so I went back to shooting and got distracted from my rant/paranoia thread that I was occupying myself with while I was waiting."

Unless 30% of people's lenses are falling apart or something, who cares, if it's under warranty?  There's probably a 0.5% chance of something like that happening to you, and all it would cost you is a week or two without the lens. I think a 0.5% chance of temporarily not having a lens for a week is well worth a $200 lower price for an amateur.



The stuff about resale value and better optics on paper may well be true, but the "omg it's going to break and you should freak out about that" part is just misleading, at best.


----------



## Gavjenks (Jun 28, 2013)

Update: as for the resale value issue, I checked ebay, and used Sigma lenses of this version consistently complete and sell for $700 upper end for high quality written, buy-it-now listings (no risk of low bidding outcomes), which is *78%* of new cost.
Sigma 70 200mm EX DG HSM Macro II F2 8 Lens for Nikon | eBay (this is $730 but was a little higher than average)

By comparison, Nikon equivalents sell for approximately $720 upper end for high quality written, buy-it-now listings, which is about... guess what? *65%* of the new cost.
Example: Nikon AF Nikkor 80 200mm F 2 8 D Ed New Zoom 80 200 F2 8 80 200 2 8 008638 0018208019854 | eBay

Do't take those numbers too seriously in terms of precision, because both lenses were alllll over the board.  Even nice looking lenses that weren't broken sold from anywhere from $300 to $800 for both brands. More precise averages would require me to go through more pages of sold listings than I cared to spend time on.  These are the results from the first couple pages or so each.

Or, on Amazon, there is a Sigma selling used for $700 (again, 78% of new), and there is a Nikon selling for $650 (59% of new).



Conclusion: *"**Higher resale value" my eye!*  Doesn't seem to be true at all.  If anything, ebay and amazon suggest the *Sigma *is higher in resale value per dollar, although the difference between 78% and 65% is not guaranteed to be significant with this highly variable dataset.





And honestly, I wouldn't be terribly surprised if the Sigma really did turn out to have significantly higher (statistically) resale value in a larger data set.  Nikon is a larger company that puts out new versions of its lenses more often and more aggressively markets small differences to convince people to upgrade.  It's totally within the realm of possibility that the glut of newly "obsolete" lenses with each new iteration means high supply and low demand, and thus larger loss of resale value than Sigma's less frequently updated versions.


----------



## Gavjenks (Jun 28, 2013)

Update #2, regarding "better optical performance on paper"  I beg to differ here as well.  Refer to the graphic I compiled below for MTF charts of the Sigma and Nikon side to side:

View attachment 48819

The Sigma looks to me to be outperforming the Nikon notably in high frequency resolution across the entire lens at both ends of the focal lengths.

The Sigma also seems to have better low frequency resolution (roughly measuring "contrast") almost across the board as well, with the small exception of the edge of the image circle at the wide end.

The Sigma has much better consistency of performance between horizontal and vertical edges.




I couldn't find side to side comparable graphs of vignetting or other measures, but MTF is usually considered the most basic/important quantitative measure.  I don't like comparing MTFs across different companies, since they may use slightly different test procedures, but unless the poster above who originally claimed "Nikon is better on paper" has better numbers run by a single third party agency, then this is the best that seems to be available, and it does not support such claims.


----------



## table1349 (Jun 28, 2013)

Gee I wonder if the OP really cares since his last post was over a year ago and this thread is from 2009.  :lmao:


----------



## Gavjenks (Jun 28, 2013)

> Gee I wonder if the OP really cares since his last post was over a year ago and this thread is from 2009.  :lmao:



Well my points are all motivated by being annoyed at people assuming "lol it's Nikon, automatically better!" without actually checking, in general.

Which is a reality that is still quite relevant to anybody reading the thread today.  In fact I think there was a thread a couple days ago just like this for Canon 70-200 2.8 IS versus the Sigma 70-200 2.8 new OS lens.

Comes up all the time, and the answer is never just "Go Nikon/Canon and don't think about it" unless you enjoy potentially wasting money on a lens that may not even be as good.


----------

