I already own the Bigma which I use with a D80, I am on the look out for a Prime telephoto to supplement the Bigma.
I am looking at the following lenses:
Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR
or
Sigma 300mm f/2.8 EX DG.
Please help me choose between the two with your feed back. Does the Nikon justify the higher price tag. These lenses along with the Bigma will be used for Bird and wildlife photography in India.
Second option I am considering is:
Get rid of the Bigma,
then,
One of the above two lenses along with a Sigma 500mm f/4.5 EX.
I'll be left without a long zoom in the second case as I only own a Nikon 17-55 f/2.8G and a Nikon 105mm f/2.8G Macro, in addition to the Bigma now.
I have read that in the Jungles of India being stuck with only Prime Lenses is a disadvantage, but then I will not be spending weeks every year in the Jungle. Will this be a disadvantage only with respect to Indian Jungles like situation or will it be applicable for day to day birding too. Any advice will be much appreciated.
TIA
Madan Subramanian
Bangalore, India.
I am looking at the following lenses:
Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR
or
Sigma 300mm f/2.8 EX DG.
Please help me choose between the two with your feed back. Does the Nikon justify the higher price tag. These lenses along with the Bigma will be used for Bird and wildlife photography in India.
Second option I am considering is:
Get rid of the Bigma,
then,
One of the above two lenses along with a Sigma 500mm f/4.5 EX.
I'll be left without a long zoom in the second case as I only own a Nikon 17-55 f/2.8G and a Nikon 105mm f/2.8G Macro, in addition to the Bigma now.
I have read that in the Jungles of India being stuck with only Prime Lenses is a disadvantage, but then I will not be spending weeks every year in the Jungle. Will this be a disadvantage only with respect to Indian Jungles like situation or will it be applicable for day to day birding too. Any advice will be much appreciated.
TIA
Madan Subramanian
Bangalore, India.
Last edited: