SANParks.org Forums

Hi to all on the forum, my first post in this section. I am at the point in my photography adventures where quality of shot is becomming as important to me as composition. I am now in a position to add to my Nikon 70-300VR on a D90 and cannot decide if I should by some "pro-glass" with the Nikon 80-200 f2.8D or go for the reach with the Sigma 150-500

I have just started shooting in manual and am enjoying the challenge of getting the technical side of photography correct (I.E. me taking the shot and not the camera). Please help. Do I invest in quality or reach (both lenses at simillar price and at my budget ceiling). All input will be greatly appreciated.

Horrace

Well, you started off on the wrong foot, I mean..... Nikon

Seriously, if you have the guts/patience I would personally go for the 200. But I am a novice so let the other guys tell you.

Hi Horrace,
I'm a Nikon man from the very beginning and still haven't figured out which are the best lenses.
I work with a D80 and a D90 and until recently used all sorts of zoom, the biggest being my Nikon 80-400 f/4.5. Then I started buying fixed lenses and only then saw the difference on quality.
Zoom lenses are great for their versatility but you have a noticeable loss in quality on the long focus. My recent acquisitions are a Nikon 105 mm f/2.8 Micro and a Sigma 300 mm f/2.8. Both fantastic glasses and give great results.
Taken with my 105mm:


and taken with my Sigma 300:

Slightly cropped but dead sharp.

It really all depends on your budget, I'd personally go for the 150-500 which would give you decent range in the bush.

Definitely the 150 - 500.
Otherwise you will soon end up with buying yet another lens or a teleconverter because you just do not have the desired reach.

If you have a 4x4 get the 200mm, you can always drive closer to the subject.

On a serious note, it is a tough choice that only you can make, based on what your needs are.

Beautiful shots Rumuruti! Michel367 I agree that reach is exactly what one needs in Kruger and other parks. I suppose my concern is whether one will get as many "keepers" with the Sigma compared to the Nikon. It's great having the reach but if shots aren't sharp then the reach has no value anyway. This is of particualr concern to me when shooting in the golden hours around sunset and sunrise and the high apperture value of the Sigma at F5-6.3. I'm in the old dilema of wanting to buy a Ferrari with Volkswagen money

Horrace, from the results I've seen on this forum sharpness with Sigma glass is not a problem. If there is any at all it will be at max range of 500 mm.

Yep and that can only be done if the Ferrari fell off some wagon.

No serious.
I guess you have seen Sprocky's pictures. Most of them were taken with the Sigma 170 - 500 which is considered to be lesser of quality than the Sigma 150 - 500.
His pictures are just great.
As I have said many times it just depends who drives the Volkswagon.

Michel367 or Sproky, could either of you direct me to Sprocky's shots would love to have a look!

Here you are.

i can get a brand new sigma Sigma 150-500mm interchangeable lens F5-6.3 for R10k! pm me if you are interested!

have a great day!

Horrace, I went from using the Sigma 170-500mm to using a 80-200mm F2.8 (push-pull type, i.e. old) with a Kenko 2x teleconverter. This past weekend I tried the Sigma again as comparison. My biggest problem with the t/c combo is the really slow auto-focus. This is due to it being an old lens with internal focus, and to using it with a teleconverter. I tried the Sigma again because of the auto-focus issue. I have also had focus calibration issues with my 80-200mm which may have been caused by using it with a t/c (I started a thread on ODP about this, you can follow the discussion there if you want).

If you choose the 80-200mm, you will need to use it with a teleconverter. If you buy a newer version of the 80-200mm, I don't think you'll have the same problems as I have had (slow AF, focus calibration), and you might be able to use a Nikon t/c (though I'm not sure on that).

To be honest, I think I'd first try find a 2nd hand Sigma, and try it out. If you're not happy with it, resell it and look at other options.

Michel367 thanx for the link some great shots particularly the Bateleur (if my id is correct). Joshilewis, the 80-200 is also not AFS so it looks like similar problems on the way. At this point 150-500 Sigma appears to be the best option Thanx to all for the input.

Horrace

Hi Horrace,

Tough call and one that will likely give you a headache before long. Like photography, everything is a balance. You need to balance aperture with shutter speed and all depending on which way you want to go, you'll end up sacrificing in the other. You want distance, the Sigma. You want a fast lens with good glass, the f/2.8.

Personally, and if your budget allows for it, I would go for the new 70-200mm f/2.8G VRII lens from Nikkor and consider getting a 2x TC at a later stage. That will drop your aperture to f/5.6 and give you 400mm reach, backed by good glass and the VRII will counter act the drop in aperture allowing you to get good action shots.

My 2c worth.

Horrace
Friend of my owns the sigma 150-500
tested it in Kruger this year
I use the Canon 100-400L, so we could compair
The canon is a bit sharper, but for private usage for the computer and normal prints
the sigma is a great lens.
(just make sure that the hood is firmly attached. he lost his in Kruger.)
He even made shots with from the hip , but its a heavy lens.