Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="robbins.photo" data-source="post: 593323" data-attributes="member: 27043">I'd second the Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 - just be aware there are multiple versions of this lens, some of them have a built in focus motor and some do not.&nbsp; So if your camera is one that doesn't have the focus motor built into the body you'll want to make sure your getting a version of the lens that has the focus motor built in to the lens.As for 70-200mm, Sigma made both an HSM I and HSM II non-os version in the Nikon mount, I've shot the HSM I for a while and it's a very good lens for the money.&nbsp; Haven't shot the tamron non-VC version but from a lot of the reviews I read they had some AF consistency issues so I shied away from them myself.I recently upgraded to a used 70-200mm Nikon VR I - I looked at the Tamron VC version which was very highly reviewed, but the thing to keep in mind about the VC version is that apparently it doesn't work well with most teleconverters.&nbsp; Hope that helps.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="robbins.photo, post: 593323, member: 27043"] I'd second the Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 - just be aware there are multiple versions of this lens, some of them have a built in focus motor and some do not. So if your camera is one that doesn't have the focus motor built into the body you'll want to make sure your getting a version of the lens that has the focus motor built in to the lens. As for 70-200mm, Sigma made both an HSM I and HSM II non-os version in the Nikon mount, I've shot the HSM I for a while and it's a very good lens for the money. Haven't shot the tamron non-VC version but from a lot of the reviews I read they had some AF consistency issues so I shied away from them myself. I recently upgraded to a used 70-200mm Nikon VR I - I looked at the Tamron VC version which was very highly reviewed, but the thing to keep in mind about the VC version is that apparently it doesn't work well with most teleconverters. Hope that helps. [/QUOTE]

Verification