Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

  

80-400 VR vs 50-500 sigma
  
 
90 5.0
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · 80-400 VR vs 50-500 sigma


I've wanted the 80-400 for a long time, I know there have been some that complained about the focus etc on smaller bodies so I never got one. (Used a 300 f4 or 2.8 with t/c for the range).

They are pretty cheap now when you can find one and I can't find one local but there are plenty on the net for sale. I saw the sigma 50-500 and messed with it a little in the camera shop today. It did not seem to focus fast when tracking continuous focus(in the store I know)

How do the two compare. At the used price points they are comparable in price now and I honestly was underwhelmed with the sigma today but I know you need to really use one to tell.

Anyway thoughts?

My local lens rental place doesnt have one so I can't rent one to try.

Almost snagged a 300 2.8 for a good deal today but I've always rented that one when I needed it. Feel like the 80-400 would come in useful enough to get one.

I have d200 and d3 bodies for reference for af speed.



Oct 06, 2017 at 08:54 PM
ckcarr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · 80-400 VR vs 50-500 sigma


You referring to the G version?

It's one of my most used lenses. And I have never had an issue with it.



Oct 06, 2017 at 11:03 PM
90 5.0
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · 80-400 VR vs 50-500 sigma




ckcarr wrote:
You referring to the G version?

It's one of my most used lenses. And I have never had an issue with it.


No the original one not the newer one the price point is higher on it.



Oct 06, 2017 at 11:28 PM
trenchmonkey
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · 80-400 VR vs 50-500 sigma


The 50-500 was always a crap lens. AF, wide open IQ...garbage. Ask me how I know.



Oct 07, 2017 at 12:59 AM
Photozack81
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · 80-400 VR vs 50-500 sigma


This thread may offer some insights. It's discussing the AF-D 80-400

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1510028



Oct 07, 2017 at 01:37 AM
Imagemaster
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · 80-400 VR vs 50-500 sigma


Get either version of the Nikon. The Sigma is a Big Pig.


Oct 07, 2017 at 03:15 AM
RandyR
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · 80-400 VR vs 50-500 sigma


the afd is too slow to focus on anything moving, it can be done, go look at Morriss stuff but the afs is way fast enough.
IQ from both will surprise you

the bigma as it was called was total crap, I suspect it's better now



Oct 07, 2017 at 10:38 AM
viczig
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · 80-400 VR vs 50-500 sigma


I've owned both and still have the 80-400D that I've owned for about 6 years. The Sigma had poor image quality, the Nikon 300 f2.8 that I owned had superior focusing speed and better image quality but that's one of Nikon's best lenses.
The bad rap with the 80-400D was mainly the focusing speed but as mentioned its body dependent. I've used it on a D2X, D3 for wildlife and now I use it mainly for airshows because of its weight and never had any focusing issues. I took it out for a spin this week on a D500 and it performed great.




  NIKON D500    80.0-400.0 mm f/4.5-5.6 lens    98mm    f/13.0    1/125s    100 ISO    -1.0 EV  




Oct 07, 2017 at 11:23 AM
DABNIK
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · 80-400 VR vs 50-500 sigma


I agree 100%.
But don't ask me how I know, either😨
Psst-wanna buy a paper weight??

trenchmonkey wrote:
The 50-500 was always a crap lens. AF, wide open IQ...garbage. Ask me how I know.




Oct 07, 2017 at 12:59 PM
90 5.0
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · 80-400 VR vs 50-500 sigma


Iím more than likely gonna buy it Monday if itís still availible.

Iíve just realized however that I basically no longer own any decent fx zooms so now Iím contemplating getting a decent zoom in fx(most of my zooms are crap anyway)

Since I just got the d3 i really noticed my lack of a walk around zoom. But I still have a d80 and a d200 to shoot with anyway.

I might find something like the old 24-85 2.8-4 for walk around. Iíd really like another 17-35(should have never gotten rid of that)

Primes are covered for the most part 28 2.8(ais and afd),50 1.4 afd,85 1.8 afd and a 135 2.8

Ah decisions decisions.



Oct 07, 2017 at 11:17 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



nuclearjock
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · 80-400 VR vs 50-500 sigma


trenchmonkey wrote:
The 50-500 was always a crap lens. AF, wide open IQ...garbage. Ask me how I know.


True dat!



Oct 08, 2017 at 01:19 AM
montynj1
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · 80-400 VR vs 50-500 sigma


90 5.0 wrote:
Iíve just realized however that I basically no longer own any decent fx zooms so now Iím contemplating getting a decent zoom in fx(most of my zooms are crap anyway)

Since I just got the d3 i really noticed my lack of a walk around zoom. But I still have a d80 and a d200 to shoot with anyway.

I might find something like the old 24-85 2.8-4 for walk around. Iíd really like another 17-35(should have never gotten rid of that)




Have you looked at 70-300mm? It's a very affordable lightweight lens with excellent image quality.



Oct 09, 2017 at 06:38 PM
90 5.0
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · 80-400 VR vs 50-500 sigma




montynj1 wrote:
Have you looked at 70-300mm? It's a very affordable lightweight lens with excellent image quality.


I have one, it doesnít go wide enough for me as a general purpose walk around lens.

I might grab a 24-70 2.8 tamaron I saw locally for a good deal, Iíd rather have the Nikon version but for a walk around I think it would be fine.

I found the old Nikon 24/85 2.8-4 also for about the same price. Battling between those two right now.





Oct 09, 2017 at 07:35 PM
elkhornsun
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · 80-400 VR vs 50-500 sigma


I have the 80-400mm and the 200-500mm and of the two I use the 80-400mm the most. The 80-400mm focuses better and the 80mm focal length is not too long even on a DX camera. The 80-400mm is quite usable even with a TC-14 teleconverter attached and on a camera like the D7200 or D750 the autofocus is acceptable, VR is effective, and the image quality is excellent.

Something to consider in your thought process is that most Nikon lenses use a 77mm size filter as does the 80-400mm and Nikon lenses do not work with Sigma teleconverters and vice versa. In the long run it can save money and inconvenience to stick with Nikon lenses as much as possible. I do have a Sigma 24mm f/1.4 however, though it too takes a 77mm size filter.



Oct 10, 2017 at 05:01 PM
90 5.0
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · 80-400 VR vs 50-500 sigma




elkhornsun wrote:
I have the 80-400mm and the 200-500mm and of the two I use the 80-400mm the most. The 80-400mm focuses better and the 80mm focal length is not too long even on a DX camera. The 80-400mm is quite usable even with a TC-14 teleconverter attached and on a camera like the D7200 or D750 the autofocus is acceptable, VR is effective, and the image quality is excellent.

Something to consider in your thought process is that most Nikon lenses use a 77mm size filter as does the 80-400mm and Nikon lenses do not work with Sigma teleconverters and vice
...Show more

The g or the af-d?





Oct 10, 2017 at 05:15 PM
montynj1
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · 80-400 VR vs 50-500 sigma


I just recently picked up the 80-400mm g model and found the focusing speed very good on my D300 and D750. The nice thing I like about the 80-400mm is that for most situations, you don't need a tripod or mono-pod to handle it even when fully extended to 400mm. I keep the tripod collar on to use it as a carrying handle. When fully compressed, it's pretty compact.

I don't know if that's as true with the 200-500mm. I've seen the 200-500mm fully extended and it looks pretty bulky. That's my personal view though. Others who own one can comment on the handling of it better than I can.

In terms of considering a walk-around lens, which camera do you do most of your walking around with and where (dx vs fx & wide open country vs city)?



Oct 11, 2017 at 05:31 PM
90 5.0
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · 80-400 VR vs 50-500 sigma




montynj1 wrote:
I just recently picked up the 80-400mm g model and found the focusing speed very good on my D300 and D750. The nice thing I like about the 80-400mm is that for most situations, you don't need a tripod or mono-pod to handle it even when fully extended to 400mm. I keep the tripod collar on to use it as a carrying handle. When fully compressed, it's pretty compact.

I don't know if that's as true with the 200-500mm. I've seen the 200-500mm fully extended and it looks pretty bulky. That's my personal view though. Others who own one can
...Show more


I do a lot of both have typicall done walk around shots with a d80 or 200 with an 18-55vr or a 55-200vr and sometime the 28 2.8/50 1.4 and 85 1.8 in pockets but that get annoying sometimes.

Want to start walking around more with my D3 and looking for a good walk around for it.
If i get the 80-400 it will be used for nature and boat racing shooting with the d3.
I used to own the 300f/4 and have rented 300/400 2.8ís before but those get annoying for an all around as they are big and stuck at focal length.

There is a smoking deal on a 300 2.8 at a local shop that is perfect but ugly from use I have been tempted to get but it still doesnít serve the fixed focal length issue.

Thinking with the 80-400 I can zoom in and out in the pits etc and as boats get closer and further moving down the course.

I donít want to carry a ton of photo equipment when at races since Iím a racer and have so much packed already for racing my self but want to take better pictures of other classes racing than I have been with my d200 70-300 without the hassle of renting and carrying something monsterous like the 400 2.8 and another camera with another lens on it.

As a kid I had to lug around my dads 300 2.8 and extra body and it was a hassle. So Iíve known for a long time just rent one for some intended purposes.

Took a 400 2.8 to the zoo with the kids one time and was immediately reminded of how it was better as a kid when my dad didnít bring all that crap !!!!



Oct 11, 2017 at 08:05 PM
montynj1
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · 80-400 VR vs 50-500 sigma


Have you considered upgrading the d200 to either a d500 or d7500? The combo of d500/d7500 & your 70-300 with maybe a 24mm 2.8 in your pocket can give you the lightest and easiest handling package. The extra megapixels can allow you to blow up the images with minimal loss of detail during post-processing. I'm seriously considering upgrading my d300 to either the d500 or d7500 after seeing some of the images I was able to blow up with my d750.

Both the 80-400mm and 200-500mm lens are not light and can get a bit heavy after a couple of hours.

btw.. you didn't make your kid carry the 400 2.8?



Oct 12, 2017 at 01:42 PM
Snopchenko
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · 80-400 VR vs 50-500 sigma


I did not like the 24-85/2.8-4 when I had it. I think the 24-85/3.5-4.5 is a lot better (and it has a built-in silent focusing motor to boot). Just FYI - maybe the 3.5-4.5 is worth hunting down. I've been using the Canon version of it and couldn't be happier.


Oct 12, 2017 at 05:45 PM
90 5.0
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · 80-400 VR vs 50-500 sigma


I bought an 80-400 off here. Waiting for it to ship and Iíll get to finally try one.

So now the hunt is back on for a walk around fx

Have found several decent candidates just need to make up my mind on what I want and would use the most.




Oct 14, 2017 at 06:27 PM







FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password