Sooo, which 70-200 2.8?

R

Ruidoso Bill

Senior Member
I use a Nikon 70-200 f2.8 VRI and have had no reason to upgrade to the VRII, mine seems plenty sharp all around. I use it on both the D700 and D800 bodies.
 
C

carguy

Senior Member
SkvLTD said:
Also starting to consider, 50 1.4D (maybe?) and then Tammy 150-600 to really get a nice reach on wildlife. I know that going from 300>200 will kill and and all birding for me, but 50 might just be wide enough for those dim indoor shots. Should be miles better than 3.5 on my 24-85, won't break my bank, and won't limit what I can shoot. I've done moving on my feet plenty, so won't be anything new to me, although if I ever try concerts I can definitely kiss any decent shots goodbye unless I can magically be in the pit and crop later.
Click to expand...

This is a 50mm 1.8G 'In the pit' - don't count it

I'm in a similar dilemma. Was looking out for a 17-55 but realized I can get more use out of longer glass (youth hockey and soccer). I'm looking at trying out the Sigma 50-150mm on my D7100 next week.


The Guess Who by MichiganClassics.com, on Flickr
 
SkvLTD

SkvLTD

Senior Member
carguy said:
This is a 50mm 1.8G 'In the pit' - don't count it

I'm in a similar dilemma. Was looking out for a 17-55 but realized I can get more use out of longer glass (youth hockey and soccer). I'm looking at trying out the Sigma 50-150mm on my D7100 next week.


The Guess Who by MichiganClassics.com, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Problem w/ Sigma 500 and Tammy 600 - strictly sunny side up. I wouldn't even think of taking either indoors, but having a little-barrel-distortion, continuous aperture is just too tempting. Not to mention properly weather sealed lens unlike other extenders.

I do end up doing more wildlife on average, so I'll likey get the new tammy and then maybe a 50 1.8. A 1.4 is even more tempting, but mixed bag of reviews. Plus for a fast lens, maybe the D will do just fine and save some weight.
 
C

carguy

Senior Member
Interesting, in my reading up on this lens, I haven't heard one thing about issues in low light. Guess I'll find out.
 
G

gqtuazon

Gear Head
SkvLTD said:
Also starting to consider, 50 1.4D (maybe?) and then Tammy 150-600 to really get a nice reach on wildlife. I know that going from 300>200 will kill and and all birding for me, but 50 might just be wide enough for those dim indoor shots. Should be miles better than 3.5 on my 24-85, won't break my bank, and won't limit what I can shoot. I've done moving on my feet plenty, so won't be anything new to me, although if I ever try concerts I can definitely kiss any decent shots goodbye unless I can magically be in the pit and crop later.
Click to expand...

Used Nikon 70-200mm f2.8VRI cost around $1200 give or take a few. Your statements have confused me about your target lens. It appears that you have strayed away from the original topic. Save some cash and get the lenses that you really want instead half-a$$ing it (Please pardon my language - I couldn't come up with an appropriate word).
 
S

ShootRaw

Senior Member
carguy said:
Interesting, in my reading up on this lens, I haven't heard one thing about issues in low light. Guess I'll find out.
Click to expand...

Ha... I used to have the Sigma 50mm-150mm 2.8 OS... When I had a D7100... That lens is outstanding .. If you want to purchase that lens.. Lmk and I will send u a link to get a new one lower then Amazon's $950 price tag...
 
SkvLTD

SkvLTD

Senior Member
gqtuazon said:
Used Nikon 70-200mm f2.8VRI cost around $1200 give or take a few. Your statements have confused me about your target lens. It appears that you have strayed away from the original topic. Save some cash and get the lenses that you really want instead half-a$$ing it (Please pardon my language - I couldn't come up with an appropriate word).
Click to expand...

Well I'm just starting to weigh the cost-benefit of each in a long run given what I do the most. TC is also an option, but now cheap either.
 
J

JackStalk

Senior Member
I own a 70-200VR1 and I'm quite happy with it. I bought it AND a 14-24 for the price of a brand new VR2. I'd say if you can get it for under $1200 then it's definitely a good deal. It's an excellent piece of glass and a few of my friends have used theirs for years and swear by them. I'm always a fan of getting the newest outgoing model of something because it's the best deal, and at one point it was the top of the line product.
 
Top