04-04-2012, 01:43 PM
[quote name='thxbb12' timestamp='1333020384' post='17144']
Indeed the 20mm f/2.8 seems nice.
There is also the Tamron 17-35 f/2.8-4 that seems like a good value. Quite a few reports claim it's pretty descent. It can be had for ~$200 used, so it may be worth checking out.
From the test here, the Nikkor 24-120 f/4 didn't impress me, especially regarding its price. The long end seems quite weak. From f/5.6 on, it seems pretty descent though. I think it's overpriced for what you get.
Any idea when the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 will be released? From the specs and price it seems to be in direct competition with the Nikkor 24-70, as it's almost as expensive (~1200 swiss francs, whereas the Nikkor is ~1500).
I wonder if the new Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 OS HSM is not better than the old Nikkor 80-200. The Nikkor is still a little bit more expensive while having a shorter range and no OS. Why would you recommend the 80-200 over it?
[/quote]
I am not sure that I would prefer the N 80-200 over the Sigma. I think for that lens you need VR and the Sigma has it. Ihave no personal experience with the Sigma 70-200, but I did not like the 24-70. All reports say the 70-200 is quite good if you close it down a bit and of course really good value. Have you seen a price for the Tamron 24-70 VC?
Indeed the 20mm f/2.8 seems nice.
There is also the Tamron 17-35 f/2.8-4 that seems like a good value. Quite a few reports claim it's pretty descent. It can be had for ~$200 used, so it may be worth checking out.
From the test here, the Nikkor 24-120 f/4 didn't impress me, especially regarding its price. The long end seems quite weak. From f/5.6 on, it seems pretty descent though. I think it's overpriced for what you get.
Any idea when the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 will be released? From the specs and price it seems to be in direct competition with the Nikkor 24-70, as it's almost as expensive (~1200 swiss francs, whereas the Nikkor is ~1500).
I wonder if the new Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 OS HSM is not better than the old Nikkor 80-200. The Nikkor is still a little bit more expensive while having a shorter range and no OS. Why would you recommend the 80-200 over it?
[/quote]
I am not sure that I would prefer the N 80-200 over the Sigma. I think for that lens you need VR and the Sigma has it. Ihave no personal experience with the Sigma 70-200, but I did not like the 24-70. All reports say the 70-200 is quite good if you close it down a bit and of course really good value. Have you seen a price for the Tamron 24-70 VC?