Varig767 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2005, 177 posts, RR: 2 Posted (1 month 1 week 1 day ago) and read 1154 times:
Hello all,
I am looking for a new lens for my Sony Alpha 200 DSLR in addition to or to replace my Sigma 70-210. Budget is about € 700 (approx. $ 900). I have done some research and I made a selection of the following five lenses (in order of lowest price):
1. Sigma APO 70-200mm F2.8 II EX DG MACRO HSM (€ 629)
As you can see, one interesting question is whether I should go for a rather high-end average zoom range (choice number 1 and 4) or for “high-tele” like number 2,3 and 5.
First, I was strongly attracted to number 2; this is the replacement of Sigma's 135-400 and it offers quite some "tele-capacities" for a fair price. Doing research resulted in the other 4 options.
Which one would you advise, and why would you do that?? I am looking forward to your opinions!
Dvincent From United States, joined Jan 2007, 799 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (1 month 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 1085 times:
You might want to look into the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8. It has better optical quality than the Sigma, and costs $100 less, but it doesn't have an HSM motor.
I would avoid the mirror lens (Sony 500mm) as its AF performance is dreadful for tracking subjects. It is great for stationary things, though. Its donut blur can also be distracting.
The 70-300 G might be the best bet if you're sticking to outdoor type shots. It's extremely sharp wide open and it focuses very fast thanks to the SSM motor. It's a case where trading some aperture for length works out well. You can shoot at f/5.6 and still get great results so going wide open should not be a fear with it. It also has things like a focus limiter and hold buttons, which the Sigmas don't have. It's also compact and does not draw a lot of attention like the big Sigma telezooms.
DSMav8r From United States, joined Mar 2000, 579 posts, RR: 6 Reply 2, posted (1 month 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 901 times:
Personally, I would avoid any of the Sigma "super" tele's, unless you are planning on using a tripod; they are very difficult to hand-hold and are pretty slow on the AF end.
To most people, the sky is the limit. To those who love aviation, the sky is home
I've the previous 80-400 OS which seems to be better optically but due to the lack of HSM isn't as fast.
A second hand copy is still more expensive then a new 120-400 or 150-500.
Quoting DSMav8r (Reply 2): they are very difficult to hand-hold and are pretty slow on the AF end.
Cpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 245 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (1 month 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 779 times:
Quoting DSMav8r (Reply 2): Personally, I would avoid any of the Sigma "super" tele's, unless you are planning on using a tripod; they are very difficult to hand-hold and are pretty slow on the AF end.
Not true - the 50-500 I have is very fast to auto-focus, and I hand-hold it with no dramas at all, even in gusty wind.
The bad news? The exterior finish is fragile. So wear protective gloves, or cover the lens in some form of protective cover all the time in order to preserve it. The 50-500 is a much better lens than the 150-500 Sigma. And with a Sony, you have stabilisation on the camera body.
The big Sigma super-zooms do also attract a lot of attention.
TopGun3 From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 108 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (1 month 9 hours ago) and read 485 times:
I have the Sony 70-300mm SSM G lens and it is great, but unfortunately many of my pictures were rejected when I was using it, so I'm back to using my old Minolta 80-200mm F2.8 and Minolta 300mm f2.8 prime.
Sponsor Message: 
From Netherlands, joined Jan 2005, 177 posts, 
From United States, joined Jan 2007, 799 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 245 posts, 
So wear protective gloves, or cover the lens in some form of protective cover all the time in order to preserve it. The 50-500 is a much better lens than the 150-500 Sigma. And with a Sony, you have stabilisation on the camera body.
From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 108 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
