Which 70-200 2.8?

Started 11 months ago | Discussions thread
johnanderson Regular Member • Posts: 142
nope

scokill wrote:

johnanderson wrote:

Nicolai Denmark wrote:

Hi all,

For a long time, I've been back and forth on what lens to get next. I've been using my 50 1.8G for portraits and candids. It has worked well with one exceptance: I want more moreking distance, so as to not disturb my subject.

Been considering the 105 VR Micro as I would then be able to shoot a little macro as well, the 135DC for it's fast aperture and defocus abillities, the Sigma 135 being sharper than the DC and then a 70-200 2.8.

To be honest, I think I'd shoot very little macro and as I cannot move around fast due to impaired walking abillity, primes are limiting as well.

Whilst the weight of a 70-200 2.8 will deffinately be a challenge, I can see that it might be the most versatile: a lot of people use them for portraits, and it'll be good for capturing my son from a distance (and) when he plays football and other kinds of sports.

Tamron G2 vs Nikkor 70-200 2.8G VRII.

Both have focus breathing which is a big let down but beggars can't be choosers.

In Denmark, the current price of the Tamron new is equal to that of €1,394 or $1,569. Currently, there's a cashback of €100 or $113.

The VRII new is €2,373 or 2,670 USD.

The 70-200E is €2,800 or $3,156 but there's a cashback currently equal to €300 or $337 making it only €134 or $151 more than the VRII. So, the price difcference seems a no brainer between the two of them.

But: is the FL worth THE DOUBLE of the Tamron G2???

I realize it's better build, doesn't focus breath but still?

I'm nothing but an amateur with a limited budget just trying to get some decent shots. Not intentions of going pro. I do, however, intend to go FX sometime.
I also realize, the FL probably has more precise / accurate focus.

Is the focus breathing a problem when shooting sports?

I'm most deffinately ælooking to use either at 2.8 for portraits. Examples are welcome,

I've been considering my options here with the Tamron G2 etc and the new Nikon. However, what has really put me off the new nikon is the stupid reversal of the focus and zoom rings, now holding the lens I feel I'd have exactly the same problems as photographylife did when they reviewed this one, it's clearly been changed to simplify the engineering of the lens but nikon have been caught saying people wanted it. For the life of me cannot think why anyone would have been requesting that when the old way worked so well. Also, the removable tripod ring is ridiculous, that push button has caused many folks to drop the lens when carrying it. Seems a step backwards from the VRII.

It takes about 10 min to get used to the zoom ring and then you don't think about it. What removable tripod ring are you referencing? The foot is removable and it's fairly impossible to remove with the set screw tight.

It affects how steady you can hand hold the lens when the zoom ring is at the end of the lens...check out the photographylife review for more info.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow