[Brightcolours]

[quote name='JOLYON' timestamp='1285729333' post='3341']

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?

[/quote]

Yes, I am sure that the Nikon 80-200 is a bit better than the Sigma. The current Sigma has OS, I am not sure which SIgma you looked at as there are at least 4 different (optically) versions.

I have not seen or heard anywhere that the Tamron has a yellow cast. Yellow cast is something Sigma lenses (used to?) have.

So yes, I am sure.

[quote name='JOLYON' timestamp='1285729333' post='3341']

Close up photography:



* Tamron ==>>photo coloring yellowish???

* Nikon

* Sigma**

[/quote]

Again, I have not seen or heard about a clear yellow cast from the Tamron. Where have you heard that?

[quote name='JOLYON' timestamp='1285729333' post='3341']

Build quality: ====> photozone.de analysis result is nikon 4-star and sigma 4.5-star. so which is clearly.

1. Nikon
   
   
2. Sigma
   
   
3. Tamron
   
   [/quote]
   
   Photozone does not test lenses side by side. At times it can happen that some scores do not really match eachother.
   
   Go to a store which has a big assortment of lenses, and see for yourself, the Nikon is very well built and gives a better impression than the Sigma.
   
   
   
   You do not have to do anything with my opinion, but my opinion is based on something.
   
   
   
   Just a small tip:
   
   Focussing speed and behavior and close up abilities are often way more important to one's photography than small differences in projected image quality and build quality.

[DonAndre]

That's a difficult decision. Do you want a 70-200 because you actually want the field of view of a 105-300mm lens (you aim for more telephoto) or do you want to have the field of view of a 70-200mm lens on DX?

If you actually want a lens that performs similar to a 70-200mm lens on your D90, then you should consider the Sigma 50-150 f/2.8 HSM II.



If you look for even more telephoto than a 70-200 and think that f/4 is bright enough you could also take a look at the Sigma 100-300 f/4. It does not have stabilization, but offers even more tele for your D90. I think however that at 300mm you need to have a very very steady position to avoid blurring. You should aim to have shutter speeds of 1/500s or faster. The Sigma 100-300 was reviewed here on Photozone on the D200 and received a highly recommended rating.



Also beware of some 80-200 f/2.8. There are some designs that are push-pull based, meaning you do not turn a ring on the lens to zoom, but push the lens out and pull it back. I've heard that push-pull can be rather inconvenient when shooting upwards or downwards as the lens extends or retracts due to gravity. When the forces that hold the barrel in place are not strong enough carrying such a lens around is probably not very funny.

[Guest]

[quote name='Дон Андре' timestamp='1285770441' post='3357']

Also beware of some 80-200 f/2.8. There are some designs that are push-pull based, meaning you do not turn a ring on the lens to zoom, but push the lens out and pull it back. I've heard that push-pull can be rather inconvenient when shooting upwards or downwards as the lens extends or retracts due to gravity. When the forces that hold the barrel in place are not strong enough carrying such a lens around is probably not very funny.

[/quote]



There were three generations of AF 80-200 f/2.8:



80-200 f/2.8 (made in late 80x / early 90x), with push-pull zoom and one ring.



80-200 f/2.8 D (made since the late 90x), with conventional zoom and two rings. I think it's still being manufactured?



80-200 f/2.8 AF-S (made in 2000-2004 I think), replaced with 70-200 shortly after that.



Both 1st gen and 2nd gen lenses are screw driven and have very similar build quality (all metal) and optics (sharp even wide open and smooth bokeh). The main difference is that 1st generation (non D) has *very* slow AF gearing and not really suitable for action shots. The 2nd gen lens has probably 2-3 times faster gearing, closer to the newer AF-S 80-200.



As the 1st gen is just too slow, and the 3rd gen is very hard to find, I guess you would be aiming for the 2nd gen lens which still can be found new, for some 700 eur.



Regarding the zoom creep in push-pull 80-200: I've used it to shoot in an air show, and no, I had no problems shooting upwards. I think mostly Sigma / Tamron zoom lenses are plagued by the zoom creep issue :-)

[mst]

[quote name='Lomskij' timestamp='1285837580' post='3384']

There were three generations of AF 80-200 f/2.8: [/quote]



Some nitpicking: one could argue there have been four versions, actually. The initial push/pull design was introduced as AF lens and later upgraded to AF-D.



The two-ring version, introduced in 1997, is still current.



If the budget does not allow a stabilized lens, I would try to get a used AF-S 80-200/2.8 (but make sure to check the AF-S drive, if it makes squeaky noises it might fail soon ... that's a general advice valid for any early generation AF-S lens). However, they are rare and a bit hard to find for a good price, plus you will need a third party tripod collar if you intend to shoot from a tripod or monopod (the original collar is not very stable) and you should make sure the original hood (HB-17) is included. The hods have long been discontinued, are no longer made and impossible to find as replacement parts. There are chinese made clones nowadays, but I haven't seen one myself and can't comment on their quality.



Finally: the AF-S 80-200 is probably the largest of all options.



A valid and rather affordable alternative is the latest non-stabilized Sigma (70-200 HSM Macro II). Given a well centered sample (it's a Sigma, after all) I would prefer it over the screw-driven AF-D Nikkor.



[quote name='Lomskij' timestamp='1285837580' post='3384']

Regarding the zoom creep in push-pull 80-200: I've used it to shoot in an air show, and no, I had no problems shooting upwards. I think mostly Sigma / Tamron zoom lenses are plagued by the zoom creep issue :-)

[/quote]



Zoom creeping is hardly an issue with lenses that don't change their length during zooming <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



- Markus

[Guest]

I have really, I mean REALLY sharp Sigma 70-200/2.8 Macro II. It also focuses very close, but because of optical formula it moves DoF in corelation with aperture value. It is not a big issue since in close focusing DoF is anyway too shallow, impossible to make reasonable photo. From f5.6 on macro area focus is on it's place, and result is extreme sharp.



I use it for two years now on my D700, very fast focus, very sharp already on f/2.8, very sharp using the Sigma 1.4x converter as well. I highly recommend this lens.



Just wanted to share an opinion that it is possible to find really good sample of this lens. For it's price it's a bargain.