john*thomas
Senior Member
Very nice. Thanks.........as an aside, it's pretty stupid they all can't get along.
Question on low light zoom D7100
- Thread starter john*thomas
- Start date
I have a sweet copy of the Nikon 70-300 AF-S VR. It is very good.
My 2 ring 80-200 F 2.8 tho is magnificent - as I said in a similar thread yesterday it tracks like a laser on AF-C setting and focus is rocket fast. Paid $500 with case at LCS. I cannot recommend it enough - I linked multiple internet reviews of the lense in yesterday thread. No experience with Tammy or Sigma sorry. I have shot extensively with a Nikon 70 - 200 F 2.8 VR I - I like my lens better. I shoot mostly fast action at high shutter speeds so VR is not that important to me. Nikon still sells the 2 ring 80-200 F 2.8 new at just over $1200 I think.
My 2 ring 80-200 F 2.8 tho is magnificent - as I said in a similar thread yesterday it tracks like a laser on AF-C setting and focus is rocket fast. Paid $500 with case at LCS. I cannot recommend it enough - I linked multiple internet reviews of the lense in yesterday thread. No experience with Tammy or Sigma sorry. I have shot extensively with a Nikon 70 - 200 F 2.8 VR I - I like my lens better. I shoot mostly fast action at high shutter speeds so VR is not that important to me. Nikon still sells the 2 ring 80-200 F 2.8 new at just over $1200 I think.
ScottinPollock
Banned
I'm confused. Isn't this a $1500 lens?
Yes, the Tamron VC retails for $1,499.
It rates better than the Nikon VRI version, which sells used for $1,200 - $1,500 roughly. Tamron comes with a 6 year warranty as well
Horoscope Fish
Senior Member
I got a grey market Tamron 70-200mm Di VC USD for right at $1,000 even, taxed and shipped. Through regular channels it's about $1,500 or so.
A grey market Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G VRII goes for about $1,600 or thereabouts, while copies had through regular channels are about $2,500 last time I checked.
VRI versions are in the $1,200 range.
....
Last edited:
john*thomas
Senior Member
I've found it for $979 through a well known retailer. (U.S.)
Hi, John --
That Tamron 70-200 Di VC f/2.8 is an outstanding lens! I don't own one, but know someone who does and have seen lots of photos taken with it. It's very sharp and the VC works well. I usually prefer Nikon lenses in most configs, but this is one case where I'd pick the Tamron over the Nikon.
I'm interested in this topic because I was in your exact situation last fall. My daughter was a member of her HS marching band last year (she just graduated), and I was asked to take photos throughout the season for use in a video presentation for their annual banquet. I used my Nikon 70-200 f/4G ED VR lens on my D800, and was pretty happy with the results I got. It's a much lighter and shorter lens than the f/2.8 versions of the same zoom range, which is certainly more convenient for handheld shots from up in the stands at a game. Depending on how much light was provided at the various stadiums, I was usually able to stay within ISO 400 - 800 at f/4 and still get decent shutter speed to stop action. In the worst lighting situations, further into the season where it got darker earlier, and in bad weather, I had to occasionally bump ISO up to 1600. There were very few situations where I wished I had shallower DOF than what f/4 provided, because the task at hand more often than not involved getting photos of multiple kids at varying distances in the same frame, and f/4 worked fine for those situations where I was taking candid shots of individual kids. The 70-200 f/4's outstanding VR also had a lot to do with me being able to keep ISO relatively low. I wished it had a tad more reach for some of the individual shots than what I got on the FX sensor, but many shots involved getting the whole band or most of the band in the same frame to show their marching formations, so it was just fine for the latter. That won't be as much of an issue on your D7100, though.
Having said all that, the f/2.8 lens would have certainly allowed me to use lower ISO on average. Nevertheless, with the D800's excellent noise suppression combined with the excellent noise elimination of NIK's Define 2.0 software, I got some nice, relatively noise-free results on my ISO 1600 shots. So, all things considered, even if I had both f/2.8 and f/4 lenses, I would've still selected the lighter, more convenient form factor f/4 lens for this specific application even though I'd rather have the f/2.8 lens overall for its greater versatility. Outside of this, the f/2.8 lens will of course give you more versatility, better speed, better light transmission, and better subject isolation long-term.
Just food for thought.
That Tamron 70-200 Di VC f/2.8 is an outstanding lens! I don't own one, but know someone who does and have seen lots of photos taken with it. It's very sharp and the VC works well. I usually prefer Nikon lenses in most configs, but this is one case where I'd pick the Tamron over the Nikon.
I'm interested in this topic because I was in your exact situation last fall. My daughter was a member of her HS marching band last year (she just graduated), and I was asked to take photos throughout the season for use in a video presentation for their annual banquet. I used my Nikon 70-200 f/4G ED VR lens on my D800, and was pretty happy with the results I got. It's a much lighter and shorter lens than the f/2.8 versions of the same zoom range, which is certainly more convenient for handheld shots from up in the stands at a game. Depending on how much light was provided at the various stadiums, I was usually able to stay within ISO 400 - 800 at f/4 and still get decent shutter speed to stop action. In the worst lighting situations, further into the season where it got darker earlier, and in bad weather, I had to occasionally bump ISO up to 1600. There were very few situations where I wished I had shallower DOF than what f/4 provided, because the task at hand more often than not involved getting photos of multiple kids at varying distances in the same frame, and f/4 worked fine for those situations where I was taking candid shots of individual kids. The 70-200 f/4's outstanding VR also had a lot to do with me being able to keep ISO relatively low. I wished it had a tad more reach for some of the individual shots than what I got on the FX sensor, but many shots involved getting the whole band or most of the band in the same frame to show their marching formations, so it was just fine for the latter. That won't be as much of an issue on your D7100, though.
Having said all that, the f/2.8 lens would have certainly allowed me to use lower ISO on average. Nevertheless, with the D800's excellent noise suppression combined with the excellent noise elimination of NIK's Define 2.0 software, I got some nice, relatively noise-free results on my ISO 1600 shots. So, all things considered, even if I had both f/2.8 and f/4 lenses, I would've still selected the lighter, more convenient form factor f/4 lens for this specific application even though I'd rather have the f/2.8 lens overall for its greater versatility. Outside of this, the f/2.8 lens will of course give you more versatility, better speed, better light transmission, and better subject isolation long-term.
Just food for thought.
RussellHons
Senior Member
Agreed!!
john*thomas
Senior Member
Finally ordered it. LOL Sorry, $900 plus is a lot of money even though it fit my parameters.
Best deal I could find was 42nd St Photo. $969 (shipped) - $5.00 online code. Tamron is offering a $50 rebate also. So $914. Even used ones on eBay are selling for that.
If you have found a better deal I don't want to hear about it.
Best deal I could find was 42nd St Photo. $969 (shipped) - $5.00 online code. Tamron is offering a $50 rebate also. So $914. Even used ones on eBay are selling for that.
If you have found a better deal I don't want to hear about it.
RussellHons
Senior Member
Finally ordered it. LOL Sorry, $900 plus is a lot of money even though it fit my parameters.
Best deal I could find was 42nd St Photo. $969 (shipped) - $5.00 online code. Tamron is offering a $50 rebate also. So $914. Even used ones on eBay are selling for that.
If you have found a better deal I don't want to hear about it.
John: I would assume that is a gray market one (42nd Street is known for that). I would check with Tamron to see if they will honor the rebate and warranty on gray market lenses. It's a great lens!
john*thomas
Senior Member
Will do. Thanks
john*thomas
Senior Member
Thank you Russell........I haven't bought anything from them in forever I just recalled all their ads in the camera mags from days long ago when I shot film and unfortunately assumed.
Please excuse my language. I called, talked to them and it is grey market. The cocksuckers should note that on their website. Of to search again.
I'll pay a little more to get the 6 year warranty.
RussellHons
Senior Member
Yea they have changed alot since years past. if you google reviews of them you will see they are very poorly rated. selling gray market, bait and switch, etc. Good luck!
salukfan111
Senior Member
Why not a use AF Nikon 180mm f/2.8 and carry one more lens for the short end? That 180 would do great with a teleconverter.
You could always stalk ebay for a 300mm f/4.5 (200ish) or even f/2.8 (600ish) EDIF. I'm sure more professional photos have been shot at football and other outside games with these two than just about anything that isn't a longer nikon. If you're gonna be a bear be a grizzly. The f/2.8 will literally shoot in the dark.
One of your camera buddies will have one or even all three of these you can borrow.
You could always stalk ebay for a 300mm f/4.5 (200ish) or even f/2.8 (600ish) EDIF. I'm sure more professional photos have been shot at football and other outside games with these two than just about anything that isn't a longer nikon. If you're gonna be a bear be a grizzly. The f/2.8 will literally shoot in the dark.
One of your camera buddies will have one or even all three of these you can borrow.
john*thomas
Senior Member
I sadly have no camera buddies. LOL I wanted something with a little versatility. Seriously.....small town, I know no one that is into this.
Anyway.....the earlier Tamron didn't work out. It was indeed grey market. I don't have anything particular against that other than not being up front with it. If I had known going in I could have made a decision on that. Yes, I should have know. I cancelled.
So my choices were a new one at $1500. A black market at $1000 no warranty OR I found a Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 Di LD IF Macro AF factory refurbished with a 7 year warranty for $599. I realize I gave up a little but seriously, I'm sort of cheap. LOL. It came with the hood, nice case and factory box.
I threw it on and it's seriously fast compared to what I've been used to. I figure that if I want to move up to the VC later I'll be able to find refurbished deals and will still be able to get most of my money back out of this lens. I love the push pull manual/auto focus. It beats flipping a switch.
Pics to follow. (crappy cell phone pic)
THANKS for the help.
Anyway.....the earlier Tamron didn't work out. It was indeed grey market. I don't have anything particular against that other than not being up front with it. If I had known going in I could have made a decision on that. Yes, I should have know. I cancelled.
So my choices were a new one at $1500. A black market at $1000 no warranty OR I found a Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 Di LD IF Macro AF factory refurbished with a 7 year warranty for $599. I realize I gave up a little but seriously, I'm sort of cheap. LOL. It came with the hood, nice case and factory box.
I threw it on and it's seriously fast compared to what I've been used to. I figure that if I want to move up to the VC later I'll be able to find refurbished deals and will still be able to get most of my money back out of this lens. I love the push pull manual/auto focus. It beats flipping a switch.
Pics to follow. (crappy cell phone pic)
THANKS for the help.
salukfan111
Senior Member
Hold off on the short zoom for a little while. I just ordered a 24-85 VR off ebay because I recently shot at night with the 28-85 and not having VR was noticable. You could scoop one of these for less than 300 bucks on ebay. I'll let you know how it works out.
Visit the birder websites for your state to find yourself some camera buddies. No sense spending large coin if you can pool your lens with buddies or borrow/test their lens before buying.