Re: average Nikon vs. good Sigma lens?
- From: nospam <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 01:04:28 -0700
In article <1184140282.655253.291800@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Bojan Reljic <bojan.reljic@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Now, I have a terrible dilemma between following two lenses:
1. NIKON AF-S DX VR 55-200/4.0-5.6 G IF ED
2. SIGMA AF 50-150/2,8 APO DC EX HSM
Price is different, but it is not primer criterion, I wouldn't mind
spending more if I know why I did it.
Other characteristics of the lens (like optical/mechanical/practical
use etc) are what it IS important for me.
If you have some experience with both of these lenses, please help me
with this decision.
Feel free to recommend the third option, if it exists.
nikon also makes the 55-200 with stabilization -- the 55-200vr. it is
about $80 more than the non-stabilized version (last time i checked)
and it is well worth the difference.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: average Nikon vs. good Sigma lens?
- From: David J Taylor
- Re: average Nikon vs. good Sigma lens?
- References:
- average Nikon vs. good Sigma lens?
- From: Bojan Reljic
- average Nikon vs. good Sigma lens?
- Prev by Date: average Nikon vs. good Sigma lens?
- Next by Date: Re: People who put expensive lenses on "lesser" cameras
- Previous by thread: average Nikon vs. good Sigma lens?
- Next by thread: Re: average Nikon vs. good Sigma lens?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
