cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

If you want the best and sharpest 70-200 lens, simply buy the latest version of the Nikon, the 2.8E FL. None better, none sharper period. There are some less expensive. I would first send you lens to Sigma for evaluation/repair. I believe there is a four year warrantee so it shouldn't cost you more than shipping to Sigma and some time. Perhaps you should call them and talk to them about your issue? Best of luck.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

If you want the best and sharpest 70-200 lens, simply buy the latest version of the Nikon, the 2.8E FL. None better, none sharper period. There are some less expensive. I would first send you lens to Sigma for evaluation/repair. I believe there is a four year warrantee so it shouldn't cost you more than shipping to Sigma and some time. Perhaps you should call them and talk to them about your issue? Best of luck.

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

Interesting that shutter speed should have an effect on focus.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Erratic results like you are seeing are usually a focus problem... either due to the equipment or poor user technique.

The fact that some of your images are satisfactorily sharp suggests that the lens is capable.

First thing is to eliminate possibility that it's your techniques that are at fault.

- Do you have a "protection" filter on the lens? If so, remove it and try it without. Use the lens hood, which offers better protection anyway.
- I assume since it's only 3 years old, that your Sigma lens has OS image stabilization. Are you using it?
- What are your focusing methods? Single point? Do you use Single Shot and Continuous focus properly?
- Do you tend to use the lens wide open most of the time, where depth of field is at it's shallowest and most unforgiving of minor focus error?
- What type of subjects do you commonly shoot? Close portraits done at large aperture have particularly shallow DoF... Compared to, say, more distant sports or wildlife subjects.
- Besides increasing DoF, stopping down also improves sharpness of many lenses (I don't use, so don't know if this is the case with the Siggy 70-200).
- Sigma lens might be "adjustable" with a USB dock, to fine tune focus accuracy and tweak focus speed and stabilization performance. D500 has means of fine tuning lens focus, too... I'm sure. Have you done either?

I think that lens pre-dates than the D500 by a year or two. It may be that Sigma has done updates to the firmware in the lens, to improve performance with newer cameras. Have you emailed Sigma about this issue?

You might do some tests. Put the lens and camera on a tripod and set up to shoot a flat target with a lot of fine detail, such as a brick wall, a weathered fence or a newspaper taped to a wall. At first try turning off AF and stabilization and focusing manually, very carefully. Then try with AF and OS on individual, then both on at the same time. Try wide open and several stopped down settings (of course, using ISO and shutter speed adjustments to keep exposure the same). I'd also try Live View focus (or whatever Nikon calls it). That's likely a separate system from the array seen in and used via the viewfinder. It can be useful to compare (and may be one way to adjust lens focus).

There are also software programs such as Reiken FoCal that can automate the testing and lens adjustments (https://www.reikanfocal.com/details.html).

Finally, how are you viewing and judging your images? An image from a D500 displayed "at 100%" on most modern computer monitors is like making 3 foot tall by 4 and a half foot wide print, then viewing it from 18 or 20" away. That's rather unrealistic and overly critical. Backed off to 33% or 25% probably makes more sense and is closer to the actual size the image will be used... and might look fine. Many computer monitors aren't all that sharp, either. Often I'm surprised how much better a print looks, when it's done with a high quality inkjet on smooth matte paper. It's not only sharper with a lot more fine detail, it's also got greater dynamic range (detail in both shadows and highlights), than even my graphics quality monitor is able to display.

You're probably aware, post-processing is important, too. Most images need sharpening... particularly RAW (NEF in your case). JPEGs may have been sharpened to some extent in-camera, while RAW aren't so it needs to be done properly, as one of the final steps in post-processing.

If you're satisfied that your own techniques aren't the problem and are still seeing a fairly high percentage of "soft shots" it might be a good idea to have Sigma check out the lens.

Then if you still don't see an improvement, it might be time to consider a different lens. Nikon's relatively new 70-200mm f/2.8 "FL" VR is the first they've made using fluorite, which helps it achieve exceptionally high sharpness and make it one of the best 70-200s available.... but it cost around $2800 last time I looked! I know the lens it replaced, the Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 VR "II" was pretty impressive, too... and isn't as expensive (but also isn't exactly cheap).

Do you REALLY need f/2.8? There are some f/4 70-200s that might be worth consideration.... tend to be about 1/3 smaller and lighter, as well as less expensive. Sometimes an f/4 lens is sharper than faster lenses. But you'll need to research it... I use Canon gear, so haven't compared what's available for Nikon very extensively.

EDIT: BTW it would be very helpful if you could post some examples of unsharp images for us to look at... with "store original" checked and EXIF intact. We might be able to spot something in your setup that's leading to the problem. And you mention slow shutter speeds... OS should be able to help with camera shake, but there's a limit and it can't help with subject movement. Images where too slow shutter speed was used and camera shake is the problem usually are soft all over... nothing appears sharp. Images where too slow shutter speed was used and subject movement is the problem, only the subject will appear unsharp. And when the problem is missed focus (for whatever reason.... poor focusing technique OR equipment issues), usually some parts of the image are sharply in focus, just not the subject where you wanted focus to be achieved.

Photec

My first question is, what body / bodies do you have now and may be considering in the future? This sounds like a stupid question, but let me explain. Many of the better Nikon bodies allow you to fine tune your auto focus lens for maximum sharpness. If your body has this feature, you may only need to go into the "Setup Wrench Icon" menu to AF fine-tune. If your camera has that option you can adjust your lens to your body. If not, you have an entry level camera and will need to really do some hands on testing before you buy. If you have a Sigma lens, it may also be compatible with the Sigma USB UD-01 Dock that is used to update the Sigma lenses and also fine-tune them. It is extremely good at fine-focusing their zoom lenses that are compatible. I hope this helps.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

As an addendum, the Sigma USB Dock only works with their newer lenses -- those designated as Contemporary, Art, or Sport. Best of luck.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

The best 70-200mm f2.8 lens is the Nikon. The one costing $2800. However, not many photographers are willing to pay that amount for the very best. Therefore, one must consider other third party lenses offers. How about a Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 G2? It has good reviews, even from hoggers.

jccash Loc: Longwood, Florida

Angry Photographer agrees regarding the Tamron 70-200mm F2.8 G2:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_alz95t7rPU

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

Thanks. I didn't know he did a You Tube Video on that lens.

rfmaude41 Loc: Lancaster, Texas (DFW area)

I had the Sigma version (pre Art) and I would put it up against either the Nikon or the Tamron. Used that lens for pic that got "blown up" to 36 X 54 and everything (in focus) was sharp when viewing from less than 3 ft away. All that with (a lowly) D7000. I did have the camera "focus calibrated" for that lens though.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

The Imatest numbers I saw show the 70-200 f4(latest) to be SLIGHTLY sharper than the latest 2.8 version .....much less $$$ ! -

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikon-NIKKOR-70-200mm-f-4-G-SWM-AF-S-VR-IF-SIC-N-M-A-ED-Lens-USA-Version/282710966379?epid=129653270&hash=item41d2e3006b:g:UjIAAOSw0ehZ885Q

acellis Loc: Charleston, SC

WOW!!! Thank you all so very much for taking the time to weigh in. I think i will send it in just to rule out any mechanical issues. upon return i will try to calibrate the lens with fine tune. if dissatisfied with that i might look at purchasing a new one.

U guys are the best!!

photosfromtexas

If you do need to replace it, the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 VR has been an excellent choice for me. It is my sharpest lens. Dxo-mark recommends it as one of the best lenses in resolution for the D800 line...even above the Nikon model because of cost and almost exact resolution. There is a new model with G2 added to the name, it costs about $1200. The older version is still being sold as new for $1000. I bought mine as a grey market (Canadian) for $750 with an international 5 year warranty. I must say, it is heavy!

Jim Bob

You can "put it up" all you want. It simply is not as sharp as either the Nikon or Tamron. That's a fact.