Lens lust...

[mmertens]

...well more likely a bit of cash from selling some stuff... and the urge to buy something new (or second hand), as I'm sure we all get occasionally...
I have: D200, Nikon 50/1.4, Tamron 90 macro, Sigma 10-20, Nikon 18-200VR, Sigma 80-400 OS.
So now, dithering between a Sigma 18-50 2.8, a Sigma 70-200 2.8, or....? Budget does not stretch to a Nikon 70-200, or a D300 for now, let alone the D700...
Any suggestions? Maybe I should buy with FF in mind but that's likely a while away... I've also been thinking about a Hartblei 80 mm superrotator tilt-shift to play with... but would it lie gathering dust... 80 mm for a tilt-shift might be of limited use.

Any suggestions/experience, other than "go out and take pictures"?

Maarten

[chris.mapey]

I'd tell you to get the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 - I have one and it's great (also I have a Sigma 2x teleconverter and if you get that, you could maybe wave bye bye to the Sigma 80-400 OS lens...;))

I have tried the Sigma 18-50 f2.8, but I found a Nikkor 17-55 f2.8 boxed on ebay for not much more, so I got that instead

I'd advise some caution, and planning as to what you want to achieve with a new lens that you can't do with the current set up. Looking at the list, I'd say get the 18-50 / 17-55 range covered first with a fast lens, before changing to the 70-200 as you have that range covered already.

HTH

Chris

[mmertens]

Thanks Chris... that corroborates (some of) my thinking. You got lucky getting a 17-55 for 18-50 money....! 18-50 is about 300 quid overhere, 17-55 closer to 700 pounds...
Thanks again,
Maarten

[chris.mapey]

They can be found.

I got mine off ebay for less than £500 - boxed, with pouch and receipt for Nikon service 5 months earlier...

I thought it was worth spending the extra over the Sigma.

[Simpo Two]

mmertens said:

I've also been thinking about a Hartblei 80 mm superrotator tilt-shift to play with... but would it lie gathering dust... 80 mm for a tilt-shift might be of limited use.

Here's one I took with a cheaper alternative, a Photex 80m f2.8:



Of course you can also use it as a normal 80mm f2.8 lens, but it's manual everything.

[GravelBen]

You could go for a Nikon 80-200 2.8 as a much cheaper alternative to the 70-200. Not sure how it compares to the Sigma 70-200.

[VxDuncan]

I considered that (having had an older version of the nikon), then went for the sigma. It's fast to focus (HSM motor, which the cheaper Nikon doesn't have) and crucially for me at least, has a closer minimum focus. I was forever finding that the 80-200 couldn't be used indoors easily (say across the average living room) as the min focus was too big, or with kids when they see the camera and run toward it meaning you can't focus. It's not much better, but a crucial difference.

If you go the sigma route make sure you get the very latest (mkII?) mode, which has a few more ED elements to sharpen it up. Most of the reviews on the web are of the older version, I understand this is much better.

First dibs on teh 50mm F1.4 if you decide to sell it btw!

[dapprman]

I too have been drooling after the Nikon 70-200 f2.8 VR while waiting for my D300. I even looked at the cost of flights to the US as it's only $1200 at B&H or rather would be if they had any in stock.