Nikon Lens Question

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

jamezynj@aol.com - 22 Apr 2006 22:31 GMT

Would there be a big differencw between these two lenses, for use on my
D50?

> Nikon Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED Autofocus Lens

> Sigma Zoom Telephoto 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG APO OS

The price difference is about $400.

Reply to this Message

Stan Beck - 22 Apr 2006 23:15 GMT

The Nikon lens is VR (Vibration reduction - called image stabilization on
Canon) - The Sigma is not stabilized. That's the $400 difference.

Some say the Sigma is just as good in all other respects, others disagree.
I've seen some good reviews on both. I have the Nikon version (VR 80-400 -
it's a good lens).

Signature

Stan Beck
From New Orleans to Brandon MS

To reply, remove 101 from address.
***

> Would there be a big differencw between these two lenses, for use on my
> D50?
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> The price difference is about $400.

Reply to this Message

Peter A. Stavrakoglou - 23 Apr 2006 04:09 GMT

> The Nikon lens is VR (Vibration reduction - called image stabilization on
> Canon) - The Sigma is not stabilized. That's the $400 difference.
>
> Some say the Sigma is just as good in all other respects, others disagree.
> I've seen some good reviews on both. I have the Nikon version (VR
> 80-400 - it's a good lens).

The Sigma is stabilized, that's what the "OS" designation is (Optical
Stabilization).

Reply to this Message

Stan Beck - 23 Apr 2006 12:33 GMT

Oh, I think you are right. I knew that Sigma has one stabilized lens - I
forgot which one.

In that case, it there is a budget issue, that might make the $400
difference significant.

Signature

Stan Beck
From New Orleans to Brandon MS

To reply, remove 101 from address.
***

>> The Nikon lens is VR (Vibration reduction - called image stabilization on
>> Canon) - The Sigma is not stabilized. That's the $400 difference.
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> The Sigma is stabilized, that's what the "OS" designation is (Optical
> Stabilization).

Reply to this Message

Peter A. Stavrakoglou - 23 Apr 2006 16:34 GMT

> Oh, I think you are right. I knew that Sigma has one stabilized lens - I
> forgot which one.
>
> In that case, it there is a budget issue, that might make the $400
> difference significant.

Yes, it is their only OS lens. Why they haven't produced more is a good
question to ask. I believe that they are currently working on new
stabilization technology and perhaps once that is brought to market they'll
produce more lenses with it. There's no reason not to. I read a post just
the other day that mentioned that Canon has patented much of the stbilzation
technology making it extremely difficult for anyone to use stabilzation
without licensing it from Canon. I wonder how much truth there is to that.

Reply to this Message

Stan Beck - 23 Apr 2006 19:15 GMT

I think there is a lot to that. A lawsuit against Minolta, in favor of
Honeywell (involving some technology - either auto focus, or something), is
what ultimately did them in. Now Sony has the KM image stabilization
technology.

Signature

Stan Beck
From New Orleans to Brandon MS

To reply, remove 101 from address.
***

>> Oh, I think you are right. I knew that Sigma has one stabilized lens - I
>> forgot which one.
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> stabilzation without licensing it from Canon. I wonder how much truth
> there is to that.

Reply to this Message

jamezynj@aol.com - 26 Apr 2006 17:39 GMT

So basically they are the same?

Reply to this Message

Stan Beck - 26 Apr 2006 20:15 GMT

Close. It is a matter of personal preference. Maybe I couldn't tell the
difference, and maybe someone else could.

Best thing is to try to test each one before you buy. If it is a budget
issue, that is something you will have to deal with.

Signature

Stan Beck
From New Orleans to Brandon MS

To reply, remove 101 from address.
***

> So basically they are the same?

Reply to this Message