Sigma vs Tokina 70-200 2.8

S

swanny

Well-known member
Any thoughts on which lens is the better of the 2 out of the Sigma 70-200 and the tokina 70-200
 
Well if one of these fit the bill for 1/3 of the price. i'd be ok with that. I was thinking of going with the canons to have IS when birger comes out, so I didn't want to spend a lot of money until then, but I will need a lens in this focal range for a few shoots in a few weeks. Is the Nikon worth the extra dough? I could get the tamron 70-200 as well as the 28-75 for about half of what the Nikon 70-200 wold run. I have the 14-35 olympus right now, so if I had these lenses along with my 14-140, I'd be pretty well set it would seem.
 
Why not the Tamron? It's lighter and sharper than the Sigma. AF isn't as good, but you can't use that anyway.
 
Tokina is generally considered the highest quality third-party lens maker. The company was started by a group of Nikon engineers who did not like Nikon's lack of interest in zoom lenses. That being said, I don't think Tokina produces the lens you mention.

The Sigma APO 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM and the Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 are a lot less expensive than the equivelent Nikkor. The previously mentioned Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8 lens is in the same price range as the Sigma and the Tamron. I had a good, hard look at it before I bought my 70-200mm f/2.8 Nikkor. The main reason I ended up going for the more expensive lens is the the less expensive Nikon does not have image stabilization, which I won't go without that feature on a longer lens for my still camera. If you are shooting video on an AF100, that won't buy you anything. In the end, it will probably have a better resale value than the Sigma or Tamron, so I personally would go for it, if it were my choice.
 
I personally have not used either, but I personally perfer Tokina over Sigma as a thrird party lens maker (especially the Tokina ATX pro lenses), but like I said I have used neither of those specific lenses. While I am def. not against 3rd party lenses, you really have to look at them at a lens by lens basis. For instance, the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 is better than any ultra-wide Nikon makes, and the Bower 85mm f/1.4 is a steal for its price has great image quality, but for every awesome 3rd party lens, there are a hundreds that suck (like every other lens Bower makes), so you really have to check them out and see what feels best and matches the rest of your set image wise.
 
I own the Sigma 70-200 and have never had a problem with it. It is a little soft to my eye wide open, but so is every other zoom in this focal range I tested. Canon and Nikon included. But hey, Zeiss super speeds are a little soft wide open as well. Call me old fashion, but IS is not something I really care about with a lens like this as I don't go handheld with longer lenses. As far as optical quality goes, any of the modern lenses manufactured in this zoom range can give stunning results in the proper hands.

All the Best,

Dave
 
swanny said:
Any thoughts on which lens is the better of the 2 out of the Sigma 70-200 and the tokina 70-200
Click to expand...

We have specifically used the both the Nikon 70-200mm 2.8 and the Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 on the AF100, and honestly, preferred the Tamron. It's slightly lighter, the focus and zoom felt tighter, it's a smaller size, the cost is $700-1200 less... It's macro focusing is amazing. Really, REALLY impressed with the Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 and I would HIGHLY recommend it to anyone needing 70-200 on an AF100 or VDSLR shooter.

If you want to see sample footage, check out the below video at 3:13. Using the AF100 @ 1600ISO with the Tamron @ 200mm f/8-f/16 with a $29 simple manual aperture adapter in a live HDSDI switching environment straight to ProResLT. At 3:13 and any other shot with that angle is the AF100.

 
Last edited:
Here is a vid with a nikon 80-200mm 2.8 ED, they are going for 6-700 bucks on eBay. The bokeh is amazing on this guy.
I shoot this with a GH2 BTW


 
I had a Nikon 80-200 2.8 D for a while and it was a great lens. I had the one touch but I'd recommend the two touch for video. I recently got an 80-200 2.8 AT-X, a pretty legendary performer. We'll see how it performs after a cleaning.
 
I know this is an old thread, but I just thought I'd update it for anybody who stumbles across it using the search function.

I bought a Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 about 12 months ago when I first migrated to Canon DSLR's for video. At first, I though it was great. Nice and sharp, even wide open. Optically it was good enough that I could use it with a 2x teleconvertor and still not notice any loss of sharpness at 1080p (though stills were visibly softer.

After owning it for a while, I started to notice it was looking softer. I stopped using it at f/2.8 or at over 180mm because there was a clear loss of resolution, even for 720p. Working within these limitations though, it still produced excellent images. Further down the track it started having aperture problems. When adjusting aperture, the camera and lens would get out of sync. Sometimes it would let me open the iris but not close it, other times it would let me close it but not open it again. Even worse the aperture reading on the camera was telling me what aperture it should be at, as opposed to what it was at. The only solution was to adjust the aperture wheel so the camera gave the desired reading, then switch the camera off and back on again. Upon restarting, the lens would adjust to match the aperture set in the camera.

A few weeks ago, I noticed a significant change in the zoom funtion. When looking through the viewfinder or at the LCD while zooming in, the image would jump suddenly about 1/2 way through the zoom range; it would start zooming in faster from this point (un-naturally fast) and the image would jump up and to the right (kind of like what you see when you look through the viewfinder as an IS lens makes corrections).

Just this weekend, the lens has got even worse. The right side is now much softer at all focal lenghts and apertures. There has obviously been some movement of the elements in the lens to produce this effect. I'm ditching this lens and regret not selling it earlier, as it's now essentially paperweight and is only sellable as "for parts/not working".

While I loved the images from this lens initially, it obviously is not built to withstand professional usage. I look after my gear, always keep it in padded bags, clean it regularly, treat it delicately and have never dropped or bumped this lens in any way. I bought my copy 2nd hand after testing it out; The last owner said he had used it lightly and owned it for about a year and the overall condition looked brand new. So for him it obvioulsy worked fine, but if you plan on using a lens week in, week out, then my advise would be to go with Canon or Nikon.

I'm currently pulling together the funds to get a Nikon 80-200mm a.s.a.p. because of their legendary build quality and durability. It will also futureproof me if I decide to get a AF100 or FS100 sometime soon.
 
Dont forget the tamron is internal zooming, i believe the sigma extends when zooming. (correct me if im wrong) and i much prefer the lens not to extend
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top