Still haven't bought a 70-.....

M

murphc13

Senior Member
200mm lens
I currently own a d810,50 1.8,tam 70-300 VC,
tam 24-70 VC,sigma sport 150-600.
th Nikon vr2 is expensive and from what I've read it's the af acquisition that trumps the Tamron 70-200 VC
Real world experience of both is another thing so can you guys share your thought and is the Nikon worth 1.8-1.9 times the Tamron?
Cheers
 
E

egosbar

Senior Member
personally i dont think the 70-200 is a must for you , the d810 has good enough low light to get away with the 70-300 and you have a bit more reach , id be adding the 105mm micro its superb portrait lens and doubles as a superb macro and a 11-16 tokina for less then the price of the 70-200
, depending on what you shoot but wedding the macro is great for the rings etc
 
E

egosbar

Senior Member
by the way im still using the 55-300 and ive got images like this on the d7100
 

Attachments

  • MJE_1058 texture tiff.jpg
    MJE_1058 texture tiff.jpg
    341.9 KB · Views: 173
  • MJE_1059 texture tiff.jpg
    MJE_1059 texture tiff.jpg
    572.7 KB · Views: 179
E

egosbar

Senior Member
and also the tokina can give you some really nice images , a lot depends on what you shoot though

this is the tokina , both this and the 105mm macro are my absolute favorite lenses for about 1500 australian

MJE_2972 straight from camera.jpg
 
M

murphc13

Senior Member
I was thinking of getting the nikkor 85 1.4g or the nikkor or Tamron 70-200 2.8!!
Id like to have the Nikkor 70-200 but if the af on the Tamron is 95% of the Nikon then for half the price it's a no brainer.
Im sure the 85 1.4g image quality would be the best but the diversity of the 70-200 would be useful
Yes I have the 70-300 Tamron but the quality isn't there.
Id like to have a few TOP quality lenses!!
 
hark

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
salukfan111 said:
Since you've got the 70-300 vrg why not get the 180mm f/2.8 if you're looking for more quality below 200mm?
Click to expand...

murphc13 said:
Yes I have the 70-300 Tamron but the quality isn't there.
Id like to have a few TOP quality lenses!!
Click to expand...

The Nikon version of the 70-300mm VR is terrific--I've heard it is much better than the Tamron lens you own. The Nikon 180mm f/2.8 that salukfan111 mentioned is also an excellent lens although it doesn't have VR.

Sorry I can't help with info on the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8. I used to own the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 (latest version with OS) but am MUCH happier with the quality of my images after trading it in for my Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8.
 
D

dck22

Senior Member
I just got the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 a week ago to do some sports photography with my D750. I did a basket ball and hockey game Thursday and Friday. The Tamron performed flawlessly. Here are a couple of examples.
dck_1808.jpg


Camera
NIKON D750

Focal Length
200mm

Aperture
f/4

Exposure
1/1000s

ISO
2500​





Camera
NIKON D750

Focal Length
200mm

Aperture /4

Exposure
1/1000s

ISO
2500
​

​
Camera
NIKON D750

Focal Length
200m
Aperture
f/4

Exposure
1/1000SO
250
​
​

dck_1401.jpg

Camera
NIKON D750

Focal Length
70mm

Aperture
f/2.8

Exposure
1/640s

ISO
3200​





Camera
NIKON D750

Focal Length
70mm

Aperture
f/2.8

Exposure
1/640s

ISO
3200​

​
 
Last edited:
E

egosbar

Senior Member
murphc13 said:
I was thinking of getting the nikkor 85 1.4g or the nikkor or Tamron 70-200 2.8!!
Id like to have the Nikkor 70-200 but if the af on the Tamron is 95% of the Nikon then for half the price it's a no brainer.
Im sure the 85 1.4g image quality would be the best but the diversity of the 70-200 would be useful
Yes I have the 70-300 Tamron but the quality isn't there.
Id like to have a few TOP quality lenses!!
Click to expand...

i thought you meant the nikon 70-300 im not sure about the tamron
 
Horoscope Fish

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
I had opportunity to borrow and shoot with both the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII and the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 extensively before I made a decision on which to buy. Cost, quite honestly, was not a factor but my philosophy is, if I can't see a practical difference I'm not paying the difference. These are two great lenses and if buying Nikon-branded kit makes you feel better go for it; but the Tamron is the slightly better lens in my experience and the one I finally bought. Now it practically lives on my D750.
 
M

murphc13

Senior Member
Horoscope Fish said:
I had opportunity to borrow and shoot with both the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII and the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 extensively before I made a decision on which to buy. Cost, quite honestly, was not a factor but my philosophy is, if I can't see a practical difference I'm not paying the difference. These are two great lenses and if buying Nikon-branded kit makes you feel better go for it; but the Tamron is the slightly better lens in my experience and the one I finally bought. Now it practically lives on my D750.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the feedback
How is the AF on the Tam compared to the Nikon?
 
Top