View Full Version : D50 and Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX APO IF HSM for Nikon AF

12-25-2005, 12:14 PM
Just bought a D50 body with D70s kit lens. I plan on adding a telephoto for wildlife/landscape and want something more than the Nikon 70-300G but cannot afford the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 AF-s G VR etc. So I'm thinking of getting the the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX APO IF HSM for Nikon AF which would be in my price/quality sweet spot.

1) Would this be a good choice?
2) Would the Sigma be too heavy for the D50 without always using a tripod?
3) Would I be better of selling my kit lens and getting the new Nikon 18-200mm DX VR zoom and skipping the Sigma?

12-25-2005, 12:31 PM
70-200 f2.8 lenses are big and heavy, a tripod may come in handy at times. Because of the weight I chose a 70-200 f4, half the weight...
That Sigma is said to be a very good lens, just make sure you will be ok with how much it weighs. If that is too much for the quality you gain, you could do worse than getting a compact consumer zoom like the 18-200 VR from Nikon or even a 70-300 APO DG fr5om Sigma if you want an even bigger tele reach (would extend the kitlens you have nicely too). f2.8 comes at a price (in weight and bulk).

12-25-2005, 02:47 PM
I keep seeing in a lot of posts that f2.8 is needed for outdoor lowlight/cloudy work. Is that true?

12-25-2005, 03:49 PM
I havent heard much about it being needed for outdoor photography, but its deffinatly needed for INDOOR lowlight, especially for sports or action.

12-26-2005, 04:25 PM
you may want to look at the nikon 80-200 f/2.8 instead of the 70-200 VR you mentioned. It goes for about $900. The VR is nice if you want to hand hold shots with slow shutter speeds but wont help anyone for sports because it only corrects camera shake, not motion blur.

12-26-2005, 08:48 PM

Not planning on shooting any sports for awhile. Just wildlife/landscape.

12-27-2005, 09:02 PM

I've owned the Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 lens for a little over a year now and I use it all the time. I've never once had a problem with it. It would be a wise investment. I LOVE it!!! Oh ya, no problems with lens blur or anything like that. Erik

12-30-2005, 11:22 PM
the nikon version is only $70 more than the sigma at http://bhphotovideo.com/. i wouldnt get the sigma even if it were significantly less money, but thats just my opinion as a press photographer.

12-30-2005, 11:30 PM
...make that $30