So can you guys help me out?

I'm planning to get another sigma lens and I'm torn between the 70-200 2.8 (37K); the 50-150 2.8 (35K) and an UWA 10-20 (24K).

For the zooms, I like the reach of the 70-200, but I'm afraid its to big to carry around. The 50-150 is a bit smaller (and cheaper) but I'll lose some 50mm in reach.

On the other hand, I'm thinking of just getting an UWA 10-20.

Right now, I'm maximizing my 18-50 2.8 which suits me just fine. But to complement this, what would be a better buy (as of the moment, cause I'll probably save up for the other lens too, hehe)?

Thanks!

Probably the perennial question is for what purpose does your new prospective lens will be used? UWA and Zoom are two different beasts altogether :D

As a hobbyist, no purpose really...

This summer I will have the chance to both shoot landscapes/ seascapes (for which I want the UWA) and also some events (for which the tele will be handy).

I will be going to coron next month, what would be more useful there?

As I said, I will most probably save up for the other lens, so I'm just asking your views on which I should buy first.

Thanks!:):D:Grin:

go for 70-200 (full-frame ready and P2k difference with 50-150 is negligible)....

from you sig you already have 18-50
go for 50-150 so that you will have a range of 18-150..

Hello Tim, may i know what store sells 70-200 for 37k? JT is selling this for almost 41k.

Hello Tim, may i know what store sells 70-200 for 37k? JT is selling this for almost 41k.Probably the stores in Hidalgo.

Tough choice.

You can still get good landscapes from 18mm, so I would say get the 50-150 first. I have one. The 70-200 is just way too heavy and bulky for me.

haven't tried the 50-150 but the 70-200 is pretty heavy =)

@Jun, yes, the stores in Hidalgo sells the sigma for a lot less. Try Mayers, 24K and M20.

@Wilson and Ari, this is what's keeping me from getting the 70-200 too, too big and bulky (although it looks reall cool on a tripod, hehehe). So is the 50-150 worth the buy over the 70-200? In terms of IQ and over all performance?

Thanks for the inputs sirs. I was already 80% decided to get the UWA; after reading this its 50-50 again for the UWA vs TELE, with a little more inclination on the 50-150 rather than the 70-200.

So confused.:Scared::Scared::Scared:

hi tim, for the UWA, a very very good alternative would be the tokina 12-24 f/4 even the 11-16 f/2.8

i had the sigma 70-200 f/2.8. sold it. too heavy for me. good but not particularly stellar wide open. at f4 hands down it shines. at current prices i'd suggest saving up a bit and get the nikkor 80-200 f/2.8 or the slower but way lighter & unobtrusive (not to mention cheaper) 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR instead

hmmm… 12-24 + 70-300 …now why didn't i think of that :Grin:

hahaha!

Sir, the way to go is WIDE. You'll be shooting more landscape shots there. I was thinking of getting an UWA for Coron but I guess I'll just settle for the wide end of my 18-50mm.

I'll bring my 70-200 na lang ... and celecoxib for the back pain :).
Buy the UWA and let's share lenses. And a couple of ND or GD filters for daytime long-exposure shots.

BTW sir, have you considered getting the tokina 11-16mm f/2.8?

So is the 50-150 worth the buy over the 70-200? In terms of IQ and over all performance?In terms of IQ & performance, both are almost identitcal since the 50-150 is copied from the 70-200.

The 70-200 would be a better buy since you get more zoom and it's FF compliant. But having a smaller, lighter lens ensures that you'll be taking it along in your travels instead of leaving it at home.:D

sigh...
I went to hidalgo to the only store wt a single copy of the 50-150 for nikon...
Too bad it had SEVERE focusing problems...
Was about to purchase it na sana...sayang...
Then i tested the 70-200, bt it is really too heavy for me...
Out of frustration, i didn't bother to test the 10-20 anymore.
Sigh...
I'm thinking of the 70-300VR now...

sigh...
I went to hidalgo to the only store wt a single copy of the 50-150 for nikon...
Too bad it had SEVERE focusing problems...
Was about to purchase it na sana...sayang...
Then i tested the 70-200, bt it is really too heavy for me...
Out of frustration, i didn't bother to test the 10-20 anymore.
Sigh...
I'm thinking of the 70-300VR now...

ouch, the usual Sigma QC issues :Scared: that's too bad. i'm so glad i never had problems (knock on wood) on my Sigmas as I purchased them all without any testing (i'm based here in Cebu and suppliers are in Manila/HK).... otherwise :Angry:

Actually the 70-300VR seems like a good choice for you. Very versatile, VR works well and the price isn't restrictive.

I had both the 10-20 and 70-200 sigmas before but sold them both to get the nikkor 70-200. Both sigmas were great optically so had no complaints. It all really boils down to your preference in shooting. If you're into landscape the difference between 10mm and the 18mm of your current lens is staggering. If you're really on a budget maybe you can just get the 10-20 sigma and a nikkor 55-200vr. That combo will cost you less than the single 70-200 2.8 sigma v2.

sigh...
I went to hidalgo to the only store wt a single copy of the 50-150 for nikon...
Too bad it had SEVERE focusing problems...
Was about to purchase it na sana...sayang...
Then i tested the 70-200, bt it is really too heavy for me...
Out of frustration, i didn't bother to test the 10-20 anymore.
Sigh...
I'm thinking of the 70-300VR now...That's why even with the hefty price difference, I'm inclined to buy from JT Photo. BF/FF is really a problem with Sigma.:Oops:

after many days of pondering, i finally made a purchase...
The tokina 12-24 (wala sa original choices). Tnx for all the sugestions!

Congrats Doc Tim! Can't wait to shoot Coron next month.

after many days of pondering, i finally made a purchase...
The tokina 12-24 (wala sa original choices). Tnx for all the sugestions!

Never let that 50-150 go :) this is an excellent lens,there's always a second chance...I hope swertehin ka na next time