Sigma vs Nikkor (70-300)

[anton_dubai]

Originally Posted by candleman

200-500mm f/2.8 is nuts.. (just think about how wide that aperture is at 500mm..
i'd expect to pay easily that price..

I edited my post above yours, and included a link to the photo. there is also a review from one folk, and the pictures of him hand-holding the camera with this lens real fun.
ps: the girl is extremely cute there... )
PSS: just another peice of fun

Canon 1200mm f/5.6, that was sold at about $ 90000.

[candleman]

thos puppies are custom made apparently.. it takes a year from order time because thats how long it takes ot grow the crystals.




FYI
500mm @f/2.8 equates to an aperture opening of 178mm

imagine buying a 200mm protective UV filter.. ...man.. $$$
my 82mm was in the hundreds.....

[anton_dubai]

Originally Posted by candleman

thos puppies are custom made apparently.. it takes a year from order time because thats how long it takes ot grow the crystals.

they say two weeks, but money-first...
now I'm really thinking of it... imagine I come to uny by taxi, since Ill have to sell the car and many other things, but with this lens, it should have a better effect
LooooooL

they say it is a safari lens, for $ 30, 000 I will come myself to the lion, and shoot him with my 55mm... even if it costs me half of my butt

[kgb224]

Originally Posted by anton_dubai

Hello, people!
Can you help me with choosing a lens?

1. Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Macro APO DG ($238)
2. AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G ($171)

I read really a lot of review, but they were either too positive or too negative, so I thought you will share your personal experience...

Which one should I go for, why?

Why i say Nikkor.
Sigma products is not reliable.
My current Sigma lens already broke a third time.

[kirbinster]

Wow I checked B&H and it is $29,000 BUT they feel guilty and offer FREE shipping!

[anton_dubai]

Originally Posted by kirbinster

Wow I checked B&H and it is $29,000 BUT they feel guilty and offer FREE shipping!

i like how this thread became a very funny off-topic...
feel guilty!!! )

[LoveDSLR]

Originally Posted by anton_dubai

they say it is a safari lens, for $ 30, 000 I will come myself to the lion, and shoot him with my 55mm... even if it costs me half of my butt

Why not? The Leica 50 f/.95 only costs $9,995.

Leica | 50mm f/0.95 Noctilux-M Aspherical Manual Focus | 11-602

BTW, +1 on 70-300 VR.

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by anton_dubai

Obviously, but if only I had more than $250 for a lens... I would go for something like

Nikon 80-400mm f4.5-5.6 VR as a lens with good zoom

and Nikon 70-200mm f2.8G ED VR II as a pretty fast lens.

Umm, the 80-400 is $1500. The 70-200 f/2.8 is $2000. The 70-300 VR is like... $500?

[anton_dubai]

Hello guys! after I got only negative feed back regarding the sigma and nikkor 70-300 lenses I decided to go for this:
55-200 VR (will I be able to Pan with this?)
And I have to choose also between this: 18-55 or this: 35mm

So my question now is what do you think?
I will have 55-200 VR. Do I need 35mm to complement it (shooting in available light should be easy with this) or 15-55 which is just 94$ gives good range, and can focus very close?

Another question is I'm meeting a guy today to sell my 18-105 VR kit... What should the price be? in my city official price is $460, on internet around $320... I promised it for as low as $260, but now feel like this tag is too low.
any suggestions?