Sigma 50-200 OS vs Nikon 55-200 Vr Need help deciding between the Sigma 50-200 OS or the Nikon 55-200 Vr for my Nikon D5000.Would appreciate any feedback, I understandthat the construction of the Sigma is better then that of the Nikon, but that the Nikon lens is a bit sharper, specially at longer focal lengths.Again, any help would be appreciated since I would be ordering the lens in a few days.Thanks in advance,George Sigma 50-200 OS vs Nikon 55-200 Vr Need help deciding between the Sigma 50-200 OS or the Nikon 55-200 Vr for my Nikon D5000.Would appreciate any feedback, I understandthat the... » Read More Sigma 50-200 OS vs Nikon 55-200 Vr Need help deciding between the Sigma 50-200 OS or the Nikon 55-200 Vr for my Nikon D5000.Would appreciate any feedback, I understandthat the construction of the Sigma is better then that of the Nikon, but that the Nikon lens is a bit sharper, specially at longer focal lengths.Again, any help would be appreciated since I would be ordering the lens in a few days.Thanks in advance,George « Show Less
75252
Thank you for taking the time to answer my question, I ended up buying the Sigma lens and I agree with you when you say that is a great value for the price.So far I'm very happy with this lens, I have used it in both daylight and night time (with external flash) and the results have been excellent with my D5000, the OS is great and focusing is very fast indeed.Again, thank's !George
75253
http://www.flickr.com/groups/d40slr/discuss/72157602509321717/?search=sigma+vs.+nikoni know it's been a while but that may give some insight.i have the sigma version and it's great value for the price paid.
963592
vr means they are vibration resistant (helps take the shake out) & you can select auto (motorized) or manual focus. this is for the 55 & 200 mm lens not for the 500mm lens whis is manual. i am still learning and having a ton of fun with it.
990746
Thanks for the replies. I finally went ahead with my purchase in late february. I love shooting outdoors so I went with the 55-200mm lens. A great point was made, coming from the world of point and shoot, I wasn't use to not being able to zoom in and in that regard, the 55-200mm lens definitely does it's job. If I shot everyday in Yosemite or the Grand Canyon or from the top of the Empire State Building, I'd probably get more out of the 55-200 lens. But I never really zoomed using my old P&S; and so far, have hardly used my 55-200. I'll save it, probably use it down the road. But when I can I plan to add the 35mm prime to my collection. Thanks for the replies. I finally went ahead with my purchase in late february. I love shooting outdoors so I went with the 55-200mm lens. A great point was made, coming from the world of point and shoot, I wasn't use to not being able to zoom in and in that regard, the 55-200mm lens definitely does it's job. If I shot everyday in Yosemite or the Grand Canyon or from the top of the Empire State Building, I'd probably get more out of the 55-200 lens. But I never really zoomed using my old P&S; and so far, have hardly used my 55-200. I'll save it, probably use it down the road. But when I can... » Read More Thanks for the replies. I finally went ahead with my purchase in late february. I love shooting outdoors so I went with the 55-200mm lens. A great point was made, coming from the world of point and shoot, I wasn't use to not being able to zoom in and in that regard, the 55-200mm lens definitely does it's job. If I shot everyday in Yosemite or the Grand Canyon or from the top of the Empire State Building, I'd probably get more out of the 55-200 lens. But I never really zoomed using my old P&S; and so far, have hardly used my 55-200. I'll save it, probably use it down the road. But when I can I plan to add the 35mm prime to my collection. « Show Less
1118342
David, you should keep an eye on nikonrumors [dot] comThey monitor all of the word on the street. Current consensus is that there is not going to be a refresh for the D700 this year.I have owned one for a year and a half, and am absolutely thrilled with it. I will keep it for a very long time. The overall sensor performance (low-light, etc.) is still one of the best in the world. see dxomark [dot] com
2059522
With the VR, it performs fairly well. It is 1/2 stop slower than the older 18-300, but it's lighter and has better optical characteristics. The 1/2 step is not really an issue. Just remember that it does stop down to f6.3 at full telephoto. If you use Auto ISO, this could help compensate. If you have realistic expectations about what the lens can do, it will serve you well.
1966952
Did you make a decision? I am currently debating the same two lenses. I am leaning towards the Canon since it seems there are quite a few quality/AF issues with the Sigma. Any advice is appreciated.
465671
VR is handy in low light when your subject is relatively static because it allows you to shoot with a lower ISO, which theoretically delivers better color, less noise, etc. VR won't help freeze action, however, so your wiggly kids will still look blurry. I have VR on my 16-85mm DX Nikkor, which I only occasionally use indoors without a flash. Also, a basic relationship still exists between focal range and image quality. At a given price point, the lens with the greater range will deliver the poorer results; it's simply more expensive for a manufacturer to engineer the more complex optics and mechanics for a big-range lens, which leaves less money available to finely tune a more simple system. My 16-85mm zoom has notably better image quality than Nikon's 18-200mm, and they're nearly the same price at $600. Along the same line, 3rd-party vendors typically trade-off build quality for image quality. So you can find Sigma, Tamron, or Tokina lenses with pretty nice image quality at prices considerably cheaper than a Nikon or Canon lens, but they aren't built as well. And in the end, yes, a pro Sigma will look cleaner than an amateur Nikon, but the comparable pro Nikon will almost always perform better in every category than the pro Sigma. You get what you pay for.
990747
depends on your usage, i'd say the 35mm f1.8g because its a better all rounder and is a lot sharper than the 55-200 ( i have both of these ) the 35mm is great for indoors i chose the 35mm 1.8 over the 50mm 1.8 because its wider. The build quality is not that great on the 55-200 and the vr motor gives a noise also the focusing speed is slow on the 55-200mm
845653
I had the Nikon for 4 months now and I like it. It is pretty sharp, not too heavy and works great. The VR works well too, it makes a difference. Here is a link to some photos with a D7000 which has a similar sensor to the D5100. http://www.pixoto.com/ralhaj/recent hope this helps
616752
First, it's not a Nikon. There is a chance that it may not fully functional properly on future Nikon models. The new Sigma ART series can have firmware updated after release, this could solve the problem. Secondly, I have had slight out of focus problems. But this might not the problem of the lens: the camera has to detect the focus difference and send a signal to the lens. If the camera fails to detect the difference at a particular point, it will not send any signal to the lens. And you will have a focus problem for that shot. Therefore, the problem might not relate to the lens after all. Overall I have 99% positive experience. As for the rest of 1%, I would argue that's is true for any lens you purchase, even for a $1,500 Nikon lens.
608748
I have both for my Nikon D300s. Sigma 17-50 2.8 is a much better choice. Range in slightly narrower but indoor performance, portrait photography, and bikes are better.
1041573
Are you comparing it to the lens without VR. I work for Nikon and the price was actually the same price I get with my employee discount and it didn't include the extra filters. I used the lens on my d3100 to get some incredible shots of the lunar eclipse
1199011
My opinion goes against some other comments. I use a Sigma 150-500 and Sigma 70-300 (the newer version) on my D7100, shooting motorsports, where the speeds reached are quite a bit higher than kids playing football, and the focusing speed is very good, especially on the 120-300. I've never lost a shot due to slow focus, even when panning as the cars go by at 150mph+. I've used the 20-700 Sigma, and it's even a bit faster.
990750
I'm glad someone posted this question! It really has helped me decide to buy this lense too. I have the double kit with the other 2 lenses mentioned. I haven't used the 55 200 yet!! The weather is terrible and I'm afraid to take out the new camera. I do a LOT of indoor shooting of my kids and this lense sounds like it will work very nicely. I'm still blown away by the D5000. The pictures in just Auto mode with the 18 55 kit lense are night and day above my other cameras. I'm in heaven!
1186498
nothing even close to the nikon 80-400 vr. I wouldn't buy it but consider the sigma 150-500VC instead used for around 1000.00
108984
The contempporary version of sigma 17-70 has an upgraded array of optics, and is lighter compared to the initial version of Sigma´s 17-70, and more compatible with newer camera models ie canon60D. This is the reason beneath the price difference. I am quite happy with my choice. Lens performance is great, image sharpness is outstanding!
150331
Deepak, I am currently using this lens on a Nikon D300 with 12.3 megapixels. I own several Nikkor lenses, ranging from wide angle to 300mm. This 18-200 is the best of all. Since receiving it, I have not taken it off the D300. I use it exclusively. It is a great lens. The VR feature is also fantastic. Low light shots come out great. I would highly recommend this lens for high megapixel cameras. It works great on my D300. I think you will be very happy once you use it too.