Talk me into a 70-200 2.8 please !
Ok , for the weddings I have done I followed some advice and bought a 17-50 f2.8 lens which I have really come to appreciate . Now I want to replace the 18-200VR with a 70-200 2.8 .
I really like the sound of Nikon's 70-200VR but it is very pricey [NZ$ 2700] [ the NZ$ is probably around US75c but is slowly getting stronger which leads me to think this is a good time to buy ]
The Sigma 70-200 2.8 [NZ$ 1299 ] seems to get good reviews but I like the sound of the VR in the Nikon especially when the light gets dim and I am shooting at 200mm . If anyone out there has some advice that tells me that I don't need VR and can save some money or that I would be throwing money away if I don't get it ..... please let me know . { I know I don't need to cover the full range but the 80-200 seems just a bit too much further from 50mm than I would like it to be }
I really like the sound of Nikon's 70-200VR but it is very pricey [NZ$ 2700] [ the NZ$ is probably around US75c but is slowly getting stronger which leads me to think this is a good time to buy ]
The Sigma 70-200 2.8 [NZ$ 1299 ] seems to get good reviews but I like the sound of the VR in the Nikon especially when the light gets dim and I am shooting at 200mm . If anyone out there has some advice that tells me that I don't need VR and can save some money or that I would be throwing money away if I don't get it ..... please let me know . { I know I don't need to cover the full range but the 80-200 seems just a bit too much further from 50mm than I would like it to be }
Nikon D80 , D50 , SB600 , SB800 , Nikon 18-200VR , Tamron 28-75 di 2.8 , Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 , Nikon 50mm 1.8 . Tamron 17-50 f2.8 , Nikon 70-200 VR f2.8 .
0
Comments
For weddings and any other low light environment, the IS is something that you really don't want to pass up. OK, it doesn't stop action, but for those slow moving moments (vows at the alter, for example), the IS/VR will get you an addtional 2 or 2.5 stops - priceless. In many instances the IS will not make the shot, but it will make it possible to get the shot when nothing else will. If you can find the funds, buy the right tools for the job.
My Photos
Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
Equipment List - Check my profile
I shoot mostly with the 28-70mm, f2.8 which serves me well. During a recent engagement shoot on the beach, I forced myself to try the 70-200 for some long distance portraits. This lens really excels at this type of portrait. Nothing like the great separation you can get with a long, sharp lens.
Only you can decide, but I think it may compliment your style.
http://clearwaterphotography.smugmug.com/
Also check out the ED AF Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 D, which I think you will find has a bit more sharpness when it's used at f2.8, vs the Sigma.
Review here:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/80200.htm
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
I've shot with both lenses, if you can afford it go for the Nikon version.
http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
After a search last night in New Zealand I found the lens for NZ$4200 , 3500 , 3200 , 2999 , and 2400 on an auction site that gives a 90 day warranty and claims that the warranty is covered locally , with the option of a 3 year warranty for an extra $200 ...... Then there is the local store that offers 36 motnhs interest free at $2999 ...
My Canon 70-200/2.8L is my bread and butter... but I shoot sports
Interesting thought here. I own the Nikkor 180mm, f2.8 which might be a great option for you. It's a great, sharp prime lens which would give you a similar effect but at a fraction of the cost.
Great bokeh with this lens on long distance portraits. Please ignore the smiling children...
http://clearwaterphotography.smugmug.com/
I often go to 200mm with my 18-200 at the ceremony, and when walking from one location to the next during the formal shots , it captures some very natural shots . I like to capture quite a wide variety of pictures at a wedding and would probably go for having the 17-50 2.8 on my D80 with the 70-200 2.8 on my D50 . I won't say cost is not relevant but I have saved up enough to buy the 70-200 cash . I would like to steer my career [ presently auto electrical ] towards photography and think the 70-200 would be an investment .
www.ivarborst.nl & smugmug
That didn't take too long. Which kidney did you sell?
You are going to love that lens!
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums