Another glass advise is needed.

FoquesFoques Registered Users Posts: 1,951 Major grins
edited May 13, 2011 in Accessories
Greetings,

I am currently shooting with a sigma 80-200/d700 combo, and want to get a wee snappier focus.

Now, from what I am readying, people say that 70-200 is considerably better (and priced higher) than 80-200.

Question is.. out of Sigma, Tamron and Nikkor, is it worth paying so much more for Nikkor 70-200 over, say, sigma?

I am not making $$ off photography.. not consistently, at least. I do have a few shoots coming up that I will need the 70 (80) -200 for.. I also shoot band concerts rather often.

Any advice is appreciated. I am going to look at the used KEH prices in a few days.
Arseny - the too honest guy.
My Site
My Facebook

Comments

  • MileHighAkoMileHighAko Registered Users Posts: 413 Major grins
    edited May 12, 2011
    I bit the bullet this past Christmas and bought me the 70-200 VR II. It really is that great, and has the added benefit of increasing the strength of my biceps because it really can be a workout to lug around. Joking aside, I have no regrets in robing my savings account to buy this lens. Every shot from it seems to be golden.

    I rented it several times before I purchased, along with the competing lenses to make sure it's what I really wanted. I have to admit, in my trials the only lens that I really loved almost as much as this one is the Sigma 50-150 f/2.8. I found the IQ to be superb, and it's lightweight and accurate. Even shooing indoor sports with it the performance was good. But in the end I wanted the extra 50mm and so went with the 70-200mm.

    I'm not a pro, and I don't shoot weddings, so lugging around the 70-200 isn't that big of a deal to me. Depending on what you shoot you might want more light weight and more manageable. For me, it's the dream lens, works great for sports, works great for portraits, has a mystical quality about it that makes your shots glow. Seriously. It's amazing. Rent one and see.
    http://www.adamcartwright.com
  • ImageX PhotographyImageX Photography Registered Users Posts: 528 Major grins
    edited May 12, 2011
    Foques wrote: »

    Question is.. out of Sigma, Tamron and Nikkor, is it worth paying so much more for Nikkor 70-200 over, say, sigma?

    Absolutely. The Nikkor is leaps better than the Sigma 70-200 and WELL worth the extra money.
  • catspawcatspaw Registered Users Posts: 1,292 Major grins
    edited May 12, 2011
    I will chime in that the Nikkor 70-200 VRII isn't worth the extra money over a used VRI, and yes I shoot fullframe too. The extra size and PRICE is just ... no. A used VRI will do you *very* well.
    //Leah
  • FoquesFoques Registered Users Posts: 1,951 Major grins
    edited May 12, 2011
    Leah, have I mentioned that I love you?

    just saying.

    thank you for the input,all! Keep 'em coming! :)
    Arseny - the too honest guy.
    My Site
    My Facebook
  • angevin1angevin1 Registered Users Posts: 3,403 Major grins
    edited May 12, 2011
    Foques wrote: »
    I am not making $$ off photography.. not consistently, at least. I do have a few shoots coming up that I will need the 70 (80) -200 for.. I also shoot band concerts rather often.
    I never owned Sigma's 80-200. I did own Nikon's 80-200 and now own their VR2 70-200. I love my Vr2. I did not rent prior to buying, but knew I could easily return it if I didn't like it. It is, my go-to lens. I have even made room in sets so I could use it. Buying from folks like KEH, allows you the op to try and send back if you don't like it, so trying the cheaper VR1, or a Sigma or whatever lens & buying used from B&H, KEH or Adorama is the way to go, IMO.

    Oh, and there isn't a rule that you have to make money at a craft to desire and own it's finest technology!
    tom wise
  • FoquesFoques Registered Users Posts: 1,951 Major grins
    edited May 13, 2011
    angevin1 wrote: »

    Oh, and there isn't a rule that you have to make money at a craft to desire and own it's finest technology!
    I shall quote you to my second half tonight.rolleyes1.gif
    Arseny - the too honest guy.
    My Site
    My Facebook
  • ZerodogZerodog Registered Users Posts: 1,480 Major grins
    edited May 13, 2011
    Another much cheaper option is a Nikon 80-200AFS. For $700-1000 you can get one. Very fast focus and sharp as hell. I have rented a VRII and it is a very nice lens. But did I get better shots than the 80-200AFS? Not sure. Maybe not really. The 80-200AFS makes either VR lens look and feel like featherweights toorolleyes1.gif
Sign In or Register to comment.