70mm - 200mm F2.8 Sigma, Tamron or Nikkor?

Samsonite

Senior Member
Burning Question! Just what is the difference between the above brands for the ''same'' Lens?

Looking at the 70mm - 200mm F2.8 AF-S on the internet, Sigma and Tamron are half the price of Nikkor, Is this because the quality is lower / significantly lower? Or just they aim for a different segment in the Market? Has anyone used and can provide feedback on the Sigma and Tamron versions of this lens? How do they compare to a Nikkor one?
 

pedroj

Senior Member
I have the 80-200mm F2.8...Less then a thousand...It does a great job for me...Haven't used the others

It doesn't have the AF focusing motor within so only focuses on D50..70..80..90..200..300..+The FF cameras..
 

gqtuazon

Gear Head
Burning Question! Just what is the difference between the above brands for the ''same'' Lens?

Looking at the 70mm - 200mm F2.8 AF-S on the internet, Sigma and Tamron are half the price of Nikkor, Is this because the quality is lower / significantly lower? Or just they aim for a different segment in the Market? Has anyone used and can provide feedback on the Sigma and Tamron versions of this lens? How do they compare to a Nikkor one?

A friend of mine had the Sigma 70-200m f2.8 and later replaced it with the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VRII due to the Nikon lens was significantly sharper on all corners.

Sigma and Tamron focuses much slower when focusing but are much lighter and cheaper compared to the Nikon version.

Once you get the Nikon version, it pretty much satisfies your gear acquisition syndrom (GAS).
 

292smith

Senior Member
It is the af-s equal. Focus fairly fast. It's been my go to lens when I have room. Much better than the kit lens. It's the older version w/o os. I paid about $900. At the timeanother $1000 for the nikon was out of the budget.
 

Rick M

Senior Member
Tamron is comming out with a new 2.8 VC, might want to wait on reviews. I'm going to compromise one stop and get the new Nikon f4
 

crashton

Senior Member
I have a Nikkor 70-200 F2.8 VRI. I love this lens & when needed I team it up with a Nikkor 1.4E II. You can pick up one of these lenses used & save a lot of money.

From what I have read the F4 80-200 is a good lens. You can get a used 70-200 F2.8 VR for less money.

I'd also recommend a decent monopod.
 

Ruidoso Bill

Senior Member
I was finally able to get the 70-200 Nikkor last year and there is no looking back for me. It is an incredible lens as far as image quality and sharpness is concerned. I have all three of the trilogy lenses and the only one I purchased new was the 24-70. My advice is keep looking for a used one, you'll never regret the choice.
 
you should look at the DXO ratings ..Tamron always scores the lowest. I just tested a Sigma 70-300 DG (fx no VC) expecting it to be rubbish at only $200 and it was as sharpe as the nikon I tested it against...cheap tacky plastic but it worked.
 
Last edited:

Photo Joe

Senior Member
I own a Sigma 70-200 2.8 EX DG II (non optical stabilization version), bought it for $799 new less than a year ago. Great lens for my needs. Focus is fast and it does focus on the lower level camera bodies. I went with the Sigma due to the various reviews about focus speed compared to Tamron. It sounded like Tamron's version was a tad bit slower on focusing. Of course, we can probably all agree neither come close to matching Nikon's 70-200 2.8 VR. I've used one a few times and it's one of the finest lenses Nikon has produced in my opinion.
Depending on your price range and what you will be using the lens for, you won't lack for options. Either way, it's always nice to have a 70-200 or 80-200 f/2.8 lens.
 
Top