I have take Nikon D90, and i would like to buy a telephoto lens with fix aperture, such as 70-200mm or 80-200mm f2.8 .
I have not more money to purchase nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VR， so i want choose one at nikon80-200mmf2.8 or Sigmal 70-200mm f2.8. but i don't know they reality performance.
who can help me guide this？ thanks
Ps: and hear of Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 lens, how is it?
I had N80-200/2.8 AF-D (third version) and I must say it was really nice lens. It has screwdriver AF. On D70 was enough fast to do some shots of kids. For tracking was to slow, but with better body (d300/d700) could be faster. It has good build quality, better than nowadays zooms from Nikon, which are much more expensive. Usually only M/AF ring could became broken. My vote goes for Nikon.
Nice day Janez
09-28-2010, 12:50 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-28-2010, 12:51 PM by Brightcolours.)
[quote name='JOLYON' timestamp='1285642015' post='3305']
I have take Nikon D90, and i would like to buy a telephoto lens with fix aperture, such as 70-200mm or 80-200mm f2.8 .
I have not more money to purchase nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VR， so i want choose one at nikon80-200mmf2.8 or Sigmal 70-200mm f2.8. but i don't know they reality performance.
who can help me guide this？ thanks
Ps: and hear of Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 lens, how is it?
[/quote]
The Nikon has good optics. The Sigma is also good, maybe a tad less in certain areas, but it offers image stabilization, a big plus. And silent and fast AF (the Nikon uses the in body AF motor).
The Tamron has very good optics, but slow and noisy AF, and no IS. And its build quality lags a bit.
The Sigma has big focus breathing (like the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VR II), making it not even near 200mm at close focus ranges.
I would rate them as follows:
Image quality (optics):
- Tamron
- Nikon
- Sigma
All are good, though, it is closer than you might think.
Features:
- Sigma **
- Nikon, Tamron
** by far the best, with its HSM and OS
Close up photography:
- Tamron
- Nikon
- Sigma**
** by quite some margin the worst
Build quality:
- Nikon
- Sigma
- Tamron
Try to determine which of these criteria are the most important to you.
For me, close focussing ability is very important, so the Sigma would not be my choice.
If I already had a 200mm lens that allows closer by focussing, I would pick the Sigma because of its OS and HSM.
But for me, in this group of 3, I would then have to pick the Tamron.
Sharpness-wise, the Tamron is probably the best of the three, Nikon second and Sigma is the worst, thgough not bad <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='  ' /> (it also depends what version of Sigma you're considering - but I guess the HSM one without OS, as this one is quite exspensive, though better optically).
But there's more to the lens than sharpness - I own Nikon 80-200 AF D, the two ring one, and it's a good lens, but it's got problems at the 200 mm (sharpness and CA), the AF/MF switch became loose and the rubber on zoom ring is stariting to peel away...But overall the build quality (except for those two issues) is excellent, it had taken few knocks without any effect, the AF (D300 and D700) is fast enough and to be honset optically it's good enough - I still think that I'm the limiting factor, not the lens <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=' ' />
As for the Tamron - I used it few times, two of my mates had them. It's better optically than Nikon, but not by a large margin. Build quality is another story - for me it feela very flimsy, both of my mates sold theirs as screws in their lenses became loose and it started affecting the IQ. The AF is quite slow, not the most accurate and sometimes it hunts a lot. All in all - I wouldn't buy it, with a 2.8 lens at 150 mm you have to be in focus to extract the lens potential and this one just isn't sure enough. I'm also quite hard on my equipment and don't think it would stand up to my usage model <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=' ' />
I don't know much about Sigma - had it in my hands once, seems nicely build (though not as good as the Nikkor), the AF was positevly fast and quiet, but it lacekd in optical department and you have to be lucky with Sigma to get a good example.
If you don't want to move to full frame in nearest future, there's a very nice, well built and quite cheap Tokina 50-135/2.8 for your D90 - I wish somebody woudl make a similar lens, but FF and at the same price <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=' ' />
Kind regards,
Pete
If you don't mind second-hand there are good deals to be had.
For instance an old Sigma 70-200HSM, or a Nikon screwdriver. They all seem to be fairly good.
I have a cheap Sigma, first version with HSM, which is so-so but acceptable wide-open and just good from F4 onwards.
[quote name='janez' timestamp='1285669158' post='3311']
I had N80-200/2.8 AF-D (third version) and I must say it was really nice lens. It has screwdriver AF. On D70 was enough fast to do some shots of kids. For tracking was to slow, but with better body (d300/d700) could be faster. It has good build quality, better than nowadays zooms from Nikon, which are much more expensive. Usually only M/AF ring could became broken. My vote goes for Nikon.
Nice day Janez
[/quote]
Haw-haw, you look like a Nikon fans. however, i belived the lens build quality. you said"usually only M/AF rang could became broken." I fear the same problem. thus
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1285678239' post='3316']
The Nikon has good optics. The Sigma is also good, maybe a tad less in certain areas, but it offers image stabilization, a big plus. And silent and fast AF (the Nikon uses the in body AF motor).
The Tamron has very good optics, but slow and noisy AF, and no IS. And its build quality lags a bit.
The Sigma has big focus breathing (like the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VR II), making it not even near 200mm at close focus ranges.
I would rate them as follows:
Image quality (optics):
- Tamron
- Nikon
- Sigma
All are good, though, it is closer than you might think.
Features:
- Sigma **
- Nikon, Tamron
** by far the best, with its HSM and OS
Close up photography:
- Tamron
- Nikon
- Sigma**
** by quite some margin the worst
Build quality:
- Nikon
- Sigma
- Tamron
Try to determine which of these criteria are the most important to you.
For me, close focussing ability is very important, so the Sigma would not be my choice.
If I already had a 200mm lens that allows closer by focussing, I would pick the Sigma because of its OS and HSM.
But for me, in this group of 3, I would then have to pick the Tamron.
[/quote]
fist of all, thank you very much. but i still a qustion as below,
for you point of view:
---------------------------------------
Image quality (optics):
* Tamron
* Nikon
* Sigma
All are good, though, it is closer than you might think.
===================>>>>>the optics photozone.de had evaluating the nikon and sigma lens. Nikon and Sigma analysis result of quality optics the same are 3.5-Star. and i had hear of Tamron photo coloring yellowish, sure?
Close up photography:
* Tamron ==>>photo coloring yellowish???
* Nikon
* Sigma**
Build quality: ====> photozone.de analysis result is nikon 4-star and sigma 4.5-star. so which is clearly.
- Nikon
- Sigma
- Tamron
-----------------------------------------------
still hold back the thing
[quote name='sloma_p' timestamp='1285678423' post='3317']
Sharpness-wise, the Tamron is probably the best of the three, Nikon second and Sigma is the worst, thgough not bad <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='  ' /> (it also depends what version of Sigma you're considering - but I guess the HSM one without OS, as this one is quite exspensive, though better optically).
But there's more to the lens than sharpness - I own Nikon 80-200 AF D, the two ring one, and it's a good lens, but it's got problems at the 200 mm (sharpness and CA), the AF/MF switch became loose and the rubber on zoom ring is stariting to peel away...But overall the build quality (except for those two issues) is excellent, it had taken few knocks without any effect, the AF (D300 and D700) is fast enough and to be honset optically it's good enough - I still think that I'm the limiting factor, not the lens <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='  ' />
As for the Tamron - I used it few times, two of my mates had them. It's better optically than Nikon, but not by a large margin. Build quality is another story - for me it feela very flimsy, both of my mates sold theirs as screws in their lenses became loose and it started affecting the IQ. The AF is quite slow, not the most accurate and sometimes it hunts a lot. All in all - I wouldn't buy it, with a 2.8 lens at 150 mm you have to be in focus to extract the lens potential and this one just isn't sure enough. I'm also quite hard on my equipment and don't think it would stand up to my usage model <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=' ' />
I don't know much about Sigma - had it in my hands once, seems nicely build (though not as good as the Nikkor), the AF was positevly fast and quiet, but it lacekd in optical department and you have to be lucky with Sigma to get a good example.
If you don't want to move to full frame in nearest future, there's a very nice, well built and quite cheap Tokina 50-135/2.8 for your D90 - I wish somebody woudl make a similar lens, but FF and at the same price <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=' ' />
Kind regards,
Pete
[/quote]
i would like upgrade the body to ff. so tokina ...
[quote name='janez' timestamp='1285669158' post='3311']
I had N80-200/2.8 AF-D (third version) and I must say it was really nice lens. It has screwdriver AF. On D70 was enough fast to do some shots of kids. For tracking was to slow, but with better body (d300/d700) could be faster. It has good build quality, better than nowadays zooms from Nikon, which are much more expensive. Usually only M/AF ring could became broken. My vote goes for Nikon.
Nice day Janez
[/quote]
Tracking on my D300 was quite slow as well - imho it has to do more with the inertia of quite heavy inner tube (it's not an IF lens). Mostly struggled with fast action (e.g. sport), especially when a person starts running towards you, re-focussing is light years behind HSM lenses.
On the other hand - it's impossible to fault the sharpness, and also the "metal tank" build quality is simply incomparable with Sigma/Tamron.
I would look at the real tests on DPReview.com, Photozone.de and lemondedelaphoto.fr and then you choose yourself. All the rest is subjective. The best prices I have found on Cameratools.nl. Good luck! Kind regards Vieux Loup
|
