Lookin For A Fast Telephoto Zoom

newb

So, Ive got a D7000 on the way. Well, on backorder. And now I need a good telephoto lens for low light and action. Mainly for use at the drag strip, and also for the occasional school play lol.

The first one that comes to mind would be the 70-200mm f/2.8. specifically the original, not the VRII. The original is getting into the upper end of my budget. I like this one because of the VR and its fast. Not sure if this is really suited for DX cameras though.

Another one Im thinkin about is the 28-300mm f/3.5. I like this one because of the extra length and VR, even though its not quite as fast. Also, worried about how good it will work with DX cameras.

Also considering the 80-200mm f/2.8. I like the range and the speed. I dont like the fact that it doesnt have VR. Also, again as far as I know its intended for FX cameras.

Finally lookin at the 18-200mm f/3.5. Either version. Really like the range on this one. Again, I can live with the max aperature. The price is great. Not really sure how the optics stack up against the others though.

If anyone has any insight that can help me narrow my choices, Id greatly appreciate it. Or, if anyone has a suggestion for another lens, Im all ears. And, Im not opposed to lookin at any third party brands at all. Thank you very much!

cab.in.boston

The 70-200 VRI would be perfect for you. Keep in mind that both of the 28-300 and 18-200 are f/5.6 by the time they get to the tele end of the lens. The 70-200 lenses are, by all accounts, far superior to the superzooms in every aspect except price, convenience of focal length range, and weight. With picture quality it's not a fair comparison.

As I understand the difference b/t the VRI and II versions of 70-200, the II really shines in the corners, which of course does not matter on a DX body. The II is supposed to be fantastic on FX, and the I is great on DX where the corners are cropped out. The II has more focal length breathing at the long end, which was/is a much-discussed topic when it was first released, so with the VRI you have closer to a true 200mm (300 equivalent) at the long end and minimum focus distance. TIf you're staying on DX, the VRI would probably be great, if as you say it is in your budget. Thom Hogan has a pretty good write up about the VRII and whether or not you should go for it or the VRI version.

Icebear

The 28-300 would serve you well for drag racing in daylight, but would disappoint in low light. By 50mm it's at f4.5. By 70mm it's at f 5.0, and by about 110mm it's at f5.6. Too slow. Don't get me wrong. I enjoy the lens on FX and DX bodies, but it won't make YOU happy for all your stated purposes. If budget is a major factor, the 80-200 f2.8 is a fine piece of glass, and coupled with the amazing high ISO capabilities of your new D7000, you might not miss the VR.

Wait a while, and Art Scott will weigh in with informed opinions about Sigmas!

Art Scott

The non OS (VR) Sigmas will save you a lot of $$$ the newer OS version not so much $$$ on a
VR1 lens but around $500. - 600 on a VRll.....
I have Sigma 70-210 non OS that I find just as sharp as my Nikon 70-200 VR1....the savings
in weight is only38 grams between the new Sigma and the VR1 lens and 110grams lighter than the VRll......
the non OS is way lighter due to not having the OS motor....
I have shot Sigma for an extremely long time and really like the lenses I own....and the money they saved me.

But I would go for a 70-200 for the shooting you described as the 18-200 as has already been said are very Slooow lenses (at3.5 - 5.6).
Also the 70-200 will follow you if you decide to move up to the full Fame cams in the future after wearing out the D7K.

Good Luck

newb

Alrighty, that really helped a lot.

Thanks everyone!

zoomer

70-200 2.8, if you can afford it just go buy it.
The 80-200 2.8 would be pretty good also, but that VR works really well as the light begins to fade.