DSLRUsers.com

First day out with my new toys

Sharp!

Its nice. Hard to say much without the exif though.

Willy wombat wrote:Sharp!

Its nice. Hard to say much without the exif though.

Thanks Willy sorry about exif .Exif has been a pain in the ass for me some times it's their and other times it's gone

Nothing wrong with a Sigma lens.

BBJ, that's why I give it a two thumbs up for bang for buck. Personally I think for value for money it's better than the 70-200VR.

Loz,

I have been wondering the same thing, going sigma is like buying two lenses for the price of one Nikon. Being a "real world" amature on a budget how much difference would I notice?.

Would you post more examples? please as I am getting nearer to buying a 70 - 200 (VR or IS) Sigma of course would be nearer

Regards, Andyt

Darryl it is a great lens, and yes for the money it is a good buy.

Andy look at my website and most of the pics in the motorbikes etc.. all taken with this lens.Sigma does not have VR or IS this is why it is the price they are, if you think VR is worth another $1,600 get the Nikon.

Andyt wrote:Loz,

I have been wondering the same thing, going sigma is like buying two lenses for the price of one Nikon. Being a "real world" amature on a budget how much difference would I notice?.

Would you post more examples? please as I am getting nearer to buying a 70 - 200 (VR or IS) Sigma of course would be nearer

Regards, Andyt

NONE - you are what makes a lens, it is not the lens that makes you. I am not downing the VR but for less than half the price you get one fine lens with the Sigma 70-200mm

AndyT,
The dream of owning the 70-200VR is now fading among our pp due to its shortage and no time frame of its available + price of it is well over the budgetary which our members are planning.

On the other side the Sigma 70-200 is performing same as the 70-200VR in all aspects, saving more than 50% of the cost of its counterpart.

I'm a Nikon fan and a die hard Nikkor glassses, as my questions to others in the past few days, why should you wait for the Nikkor while you can get a substituted glass and enjoy your shooting, moments don't sit there and wait for you to come with a glass which you want. If I were you, I go for the Sigma and fill up the CF cards

Thanks for the feedback!

BBJ, I don't look at your website anymore, I have a GPZ900r in pristine condition sitting in the shed The plan is to trade it in on a lense or two, to much time spent on your website and I may be tempted to change direction!

Birdy, I agree with your comments and hope to be in touch with you well before Christmass with an order......... unless of course, you take trade ins? (just kidding)

Andyt

Great shot Loz. You have made the Sigma lens SHINE Would love to see some more of your work!

BBJ wrote:Darryl it is a great lens, and yes for the money it is a good buy.

Andy look at my website and most of the pics in the motorbikes etc.. all taken with this lens.Sigma does not have VR or IS this is why it is the price they are, if you think VR is worth another $1,600 get the Nikon.

BBJ, I just had a look at your website and in particular your photos from the easter round featuring the BEARS. A couple of good ones there of my former teammate. Have you contacted the BEARS club to see whether they want to purchase any ?

Mike,
How's the life in NZ since you moved back there?
You missed out the opportunity to own the Nikkor 70-200VR at $1950.00 at that time frame.

Birddog114 wrote:Mike,
How's the life in NZ since you moved back there?
You missed out the opportunity to own the Nikkor 70-200VR at $1950.00 at that time frame.

NZ is great thanks Birdy and yes thanks for reminding me of that price !