[tinmingw]

i tried both,nikon cheaper,sigma body qulity seems better and bit faster but cost more ,any ching using them ,suggestion pls !

[ringomov]

look at this link !
http://www.dcfever.com/forum/read.php?f=13&i=2701&t=2701&phorum_auth=14f818d11ce248a84b0365887b50702f

[Obi-Wan]

both "nikon 70-300mm VR" and " sigma 70-200mmf2.8" not good lens, picture quality not any better than the cheap 55-200VR (which is cheap, but overall very good lens)

The Nikon 70-300mm VR may not be actually manufactured by Nikon (as its two brothers 70-300 ED & G are OEM of Tamron), picture quality is so so

Sigma may be a little bit better than the 70-300mm VR, but if cost more than 5k, it is another story.

please go to http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests & check

[boyboy127]

consider Nikon 80-200 f2.8D, below $6,500

[Obi-Wan]

yes, little black 3 is more worth

[tinmingw]

lb3 faster than sigma HSM??
some said lb3 not fast enough for sport shooting,and u guys say it s good ,really mess me up!?!?!?..help!!!

[Obi-Wan]

tinmingw

speed sigma HSM > LB3, but picture quality LB3 > Sigma

Sigma is a good choice if its price is around 4k, but it now cost much more than 5k, why buy?

If u really want to shoot sport, why don't you
(1) switch to Canon bodies & use Canon's little white, OR
(2) buy D300/D700/D3 + LB5?

LW or LB5 is much faster than sigma's HSM

[Louis @ Gooner]

"both "nikon 70-300mm VR" and " sigma 70-200mmf2.8" not good lens, picture quality not any better than the cheap 55-200VR "

堅的嗎?

nikon 70-300mm VR 用家心得的ching們讚得好勁
講到出來的相成像仲正過Canon 70-300 IS USM

請問
Obi-Wan兄有沒有收藏
nikon 70-300
Canon 70-300
這兩支啊? 有沒有作過比較啊?
many thanks!!

[Obi-Wan]

I have nikon 70-300G very poor quality above 200mm
I don't have Canon 70-300IS, only have the cheap 75-300 old lens, also very poor quality above 200mm

nikon 70-300mm VR 用家心得的ching們讚得好勁, I guess because they did not use little white or little black before, OR they don't know how to avoid handshake so that they cannot get sharp photos with them

[yinbbq]

睇過一D測試版canon70~300係好過NIKON70~300VR喎!

[Louis @ Gooner]

Obi-Wan兄
"I guess because they did not use little white or little black before"
佢地係話同小白小黑差得遠, 但價錢差咁遠成像差好遠又好合理啊
所以佢地只係用同價來比較, 話N記果支正過各品牌既70-300喎...
有朋友買左N記70-300, 但未有機會一齊去影
而我本人得C記70-300咋, 所以暫時未能同其他品牌作比較...

yinbbq兄
"睇過一D測試版canon70~300係好過NIKON70~300VR喎"
可否貼條link出來分享下啊?
many thanks!

[Obi-Wan]

Louis @ Gooner
performance over price for telephoto zoom:
1. Canon 55-250 IS (best) (* I tested with my friend's copy)
2. Nikon 55-200VR (I have)
3. Sigma 70-300 apo (I have Canon version)
4. Canon 70-300 IS (* tested with my friend's copy)
5. Nikon 70-300G (I have)
6. Canon 75-300 (old version IS, I once had, but sold due to poor IS)

"佢地係話同小白小黑差得遠, 但價錢差咁遠成像差好遠又好合理啊"
LB3 just $6xxx, LLW $4xxx, LW $8xxx (these lenses are really good lenses) but the cost is NOT that expensive when u consider the 2nd hand market (usually 70-80% of the selling price)

canon70~300 IS surely better than NIKON70~300VR

[lightcreator]

sigma 70-200mm f2.8 II HSM Macro - HKD 5700

SIM CITY MK