| Author |
Message |
javedalam
Joined: 19 Jul 2011
Posts: 14
|
Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:19 am
|  |
Hi All,
I am thinking of getting an exellent zoom lens. I am hooked on Sigma 120-300 f2.8 EX DG APO OS HSM (dont care about the weight) + Sigma 2x APO Teleconverter but have not watched (youtube review) or read any latest hands-viewon reviews on the combo. I want to know your experience, if any. What image quality would just the lens and lens with teleconverter will produce over the zoom range.
Or shall i just sacrifice bit of zoom and get Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f2.8 ED VR II Lens with Nikon TC-20E III AF-S Teleconverter instead.
Any other lens with teleconverter worth considering, any other suggetion or weblinks hugley appreciated.
I shall also point out i am using Nikon D90 with intension to move on to full frame body in future.
------------
Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f2.8 ED VR II Lens - £1599.95
Nikon TC-20E III AF-S Teleconverter - £ 407.95
- total = £2007.90 @ www.Jessops.com
OR
Sigma 120-300 f2.8 EX DG APO HSM OS Lens - £1999.95
Sigma 2x APO DG Converter - £ 249.95
- total = £2250 @ www.Jessops.com
Kind Regards,
Javed |
|
mauijon
Joined: 02 Mar 2005
Posts: 4279
Location: Maui, Hawaii
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2012 9:22 pm
| |
Question is, do you NEED the extra 100mm? If so, go with the Sigma. Otherwise, most people are very happy with this Nikon and of course, the Nikon will hold its value more for resale than the Sigma. |
|
javedalam
Joined: 19 Jul 2011
Posts: 14
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 6:34 am
| |
its all down to IQ and auto focus speed, as both lens are F2.8
All in all i want IQ more than zoom. The big question is IQ of Sigma 120-300 on 2x converter compared to that of Nikon 70-200 on 2x converter. |
|
bigrock
Joined: 15 Aug 2008
Posts: 396
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 05, 2012 1:39 am
| |
| javedalam wrote: | its all down to IQ and auto focus speed, as both lens are F2.8
All in all i want IQ more than zoom. The big question is IQ of Sigma 120-300 on 2x converter compared to that of Nikon 70-200 on 2x converter. |
I think you're comparing apples with pears....
You should be comparing the 70-200 with a TC17 to get comparable zoom ranges.
Then the Sigma is still 2.8 at 300mm and the Nikon will be 4.8 at about 340mm.
If you're at zoom settings between 200 and 300mm a lot I would take the sigma, after some test shots ofcourse.
Otherwise I always go for Nikon glass with a few exceptions, the Tamron macro everyone should have and this Sigma. |
|
rinder99
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 39223
Location: Contact www.rinderart.com/Books and Workshops www.rindersmithphotography.com Youtube/rinder
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 05, 2012 11:51 am
| |
The keyword you used was. "Full Frame" The zoom range on the sigma is to much to be optically good. It just can't be done and if it could Nikon and canon would make it in there Lineup of Pro equipment. Get the Nikon 70-200 VR "2" fine on your d90 and extra fine on the full frame. Also ...Only get a 1.7 tele converter. The 2 has issues communicating with the camera.INVEST in glass.Buy things you can sell for good Money. The sigma will NOT hold it's value. |
|
supertramp
Joined: 29 May 2005
Posts: 4518
Location: I don't know, I'm guessing. :)
|
|
javedalam
Joined: 19 Jul 2011
Posts: 14
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 6:53 am
| |
I am now a proud owner of Nikon 70-200mm 2.8 VRII.
However i have yet to get the teleconvertor. @rinder99 suggested to get Nikon TC17E II AF-S over Nikon TC-20E III AF-S, bit confused will raise another thread on this topic.
New Post HERE: Nikon TC17E II AF-S -- VS -- Nikon TC-20E III AF-S
Thanks guys for you comments.
Kind Regards,
Javed |
|
| |
|
Log in
