Sigma 50-150 vs Sigma/Tamron 70-200

Looking at new lenses for after Christmas, I have come across three that I like. They all come in around $500 or so used. I do mainly G&N with d5200.

Sigma 50-150
Tamron 70-200 VC
Sigma 70-200 non OS

The Sigma 50-150 being DX and the other two being FX. I have no problem with the DX as I dont plan on upgrading to FX anytime soon. This would become my main lens as well, Id keep my 18-55 and still hang on to the 55-200 for a backup for the time being.

I know one of the big things with the Sigmas is the reverse focus/zoom from normal Nikons, but I dont think it would bother me to much.

I cannot speak for the Sigma lenses other than when trying them in the store the reverse action zoom ring was a deal breaker for my tastes. I have the Tamron and it's simply a great lens. It does everything but (obviously) wide shots very, very well. Dedicated wildlife lens will beat it for that chore, but if you can get close, it does fine. I also acquired the Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR II, and to my eyes the Nikon may be a hair sharper, but sometimes it's not. That tells me that the shooter's ability will be more of a factor than any differences that may exist between the glass of either lens. Colors are great with both lenses. Bokeh be is mostly a toss up, but in a controlled situation the Nikon might be a little better. And when it comes to Tammy's VC vs. Nikon's VR, with my copies I would have to give the nod to Tammy's VC.

I'd be narrowing that down to the Tamron vs the Sigma 50-150 as I don't rate the Sigma 70-200 as highly. And I'd only really be going with the 50-150 if you wanted the narrow end (50-70mm) more than the long end (150-200mm)

if you are not planning to go FX, why not get the Sigma 50-150? or the latest Sigma 50-100mm Art.

smythie wrote in post #18212136
I'd be narrowing that down to the Tamron vs the Sigma 50-150 as I don't rate the Sigma 70-200 as highly. And I'd only really be going with the 50-150 if you wanted the narrow end (50-70mm) more than the long end (150-200mm)

I would actually probably use the 50-70 more than the 150-200.

Ah-keong wrote in post #18212351
if you are not planning to go FX, why not get the Sigma 50-150? or the latest Sigma 50-100mm Art.

The 50-100 ART is very hard to find used, and new I cant afford it.

Honestly I could live with less on the long end for my studio and keep the 50-200 for a walk around. I tend to shoot between 70-85mm in studio mostly. It seems like every time I look at reviews or comparisons I add at least one lens to my thinking. Especially bouncing between wanting f/2.8 or getting away with f/4 (which would add the 24-120 and 24-105). I also was thinking of the tamron 28-75, but have heard mixed things about it, as well as for me it wouldn't be a great walking around lens.

Man I should have just bought a d7000.

Quick note I have the 18-55 and 55-200 kits (obviously) as well as a f/1.8 50mm D

gmm213 wrote in post #18212460
The 50-100 ART is very hard to find used, and new I cant afford it.

Honestly I could live with less on the long end for my studio and keep the 50-200 for a walk around. I tend to shoot between 70-85mm in studio mostly. It seems like every time I look at reviews or comparisons I add at least one lens to my thinking. Especially bouncing between wanting f/2.8 or getting away with f/4 (which would add the 24-120 and 24-105). I also was thinking of the tamron 28-75, but have heard mixed things about it, as well as for me it wouldn't be a great walking around lens.

Man I should have just bought a d7000.

Quick note I have the 18-55 and 55-200 kits (obviously) as well as a f/1.8 50mm D

Think there is this nice lady selling a duet. You can try ask if she sell the 50-100 ART.
https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1471422

in this case, I would recommend a Nikon prime 85mm for your studio work or getting the 50-100 ART and mount it on a tripod in studio. With the Sigma zoom, you can use it indoors and outdoors.

Thanks for the tip. Itd still be a couple of months before I have the money though. I may look into the 50-100 when I have the money though. I do like the 1.8 aspect

do let me know! I am also saving up for this art lens.

gmm213 wrote in post #18212594
Thanks for the tip. Itd still be a couple of months before I have the money though. I may look into the 50-100 when I have the money though. I do like the 1.8 aspect

If you want 1.8 for low light, it (obviously) will beat 2.8 every time. If you want it to attain greater out of focus backgrounds, I'm guessing it would be really close to a 70-200 2.8. My 85mm 1.8 achieves a more out of focus background than my 70-200 set at 85mm and 2.8. But then I zoom into 135-150mm and things get interesting. Likewise, the 150mm at 1.8 will beat the 70-200 set at 150 and 2.8, but with the bigger zoom you can zoom into 200mm. My 2 cents.

I dont especially need the 1.8 just like I dont need the 150-200. But the more I think the more I like the 70-200.