70-200 Zooms, f2.8 vs. f4

R

Rick M

Senior Member
In considering the various 70-200 zooms, I really want great out of focus backgrounds, so the natural conclusion is an f2.8. The Nikon 70-200 f4 came along with it's nice compact size and excellent reviews which of course, has me thinking. Can I live with f4 and how much is the difference really? My longest lens now is the 105, so I tested the two stops to see if there was much difference. I figured this would at least take the aperture variable out of the equation and some of you may have been thinking about this also. I realize no two lenses are the same but at least I could expose the difference to help me decide.

Here's two crops, you tell me, BTW, the "spots" are snowflakes :(


DSC_3195_6159.JPG


DSC_3196_6160.JPG


I have decided on a 2.8
 
Last edited:
G

gqtuazon

Gear Head
Hi Rick. I was using my Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VRII last weekend during a local football game. As far as addressing the DOF or the OOF area, this lens offers much more flexibility since it is a zoom lens. During the game, I was using f5.6 most of the time in order to get more DOF or in-focus area.

The f4 model can compensate this by moving closer to the subject to get more isolation. Here are some examples to give you an idea on how the focal length and distance to the subject affects the DOF so that you can have your own creative way in controlling its effects. I was using my D7000 since it offers higher fps than my D800E.

Sample at 200mm @ f5.6

Seahawks047.jpg



Sample at 92mm @ f5.6

Seahawks117.jpg



200mm @ f4

Seahawks177.jpg


I hope this helps.
 
Last edited:
R

Rick M

Senior Member
I'm considering the Tamron 2.8, looked at both the new VC and older model. I do like the nikon f4, but you can't always get closer (zoo). At that point, only a larger aperture will help. I can rent the older Tamron from my dealer for $20 for the weekend. Won't rent the new one yet as he only has one since they just came out. Renting the old one will give me an idea of weather or not I feel I need VR or VC. I won't use this lens a lot, the occasional bear in the woods, so I'm not going all out. If I'm ok without VR, my choices come down to the older Tamron or Nikon 80-200. If I need VC, it will be the new tamron.
 
E

Epoc

Senior Member
Don't count out the Sigma. The non OS version has better reviews than the non VC Tamron and can be had for under $500 now.
 
S

Sambr

Senior Member
I shoot a lot of indoor venues, ie Roller Derby, Hockey, Basketball etc, the 70-200vr 2.8 is perfect for these shoots. The F4 not so.
 
R

Rick M

Senior Member
My fear is if I don't get the 2.8, I will always be thinking I should have, or how much better would this shot have looked at 2.8? You guys know how that goes!
 
F

fhibbs12

Senior Member
Im in the same boat. I have a 1500 dollar buget. I either get the Nikon f4 or the new tamron 2.8. Weight is irrelavent to me....
 
G

gqtuazon

Gear Head
Sambr said:
I shoot a lot of indoor venues, ie Roller Derby, Hockey, Basketball etc, the 70-200vr 2.8 is perfect for these shoots. The F4 not so.
Click to expand...

I agree with Sam since that is also what I experience when shooting indoors. Flash is very important to lower the ISO level.
 
N

NVSteve

Senior Member
Rick M said:
I'm considering the Tamron 2.8, looked at both the new VC and older model. I do like the nikon f4, but you can't always get closer (zoo). At that point, only a larger aperture will help. I can rent the older Tamron from my dealer for $20 for the weekend. Won't rent the new one yet as he only has one since they just came out. Renting the old one will give me an idea of weather or not I feel I need VR or VC. I won't use this lens a lot, the occasional bear in the woods, so I'm not going all out. If I'm ok without VR, my choices come down to the older Tamron or Nikon 80-200. If I need VC, it will be the new tamron.
Click to expand...

Rick,

As you know, I will be trying out the new Tamron at some point against my f4. I may just end up keeping both. My only question to you is if you need quick focusing speed. I can live with or without VR/VC, but I absolutely need quick focusing along with the 2.8. From what I've read of the other 2.8 options, they aren't the speediest, nor are they sharp edge to edge (if that matters). One of the biggest reasons Sigma was never a consideration for me is that it has no weather sealing, nor does it have the O-ring on the mount. It is a tough call. I know Mansurov posted up a nice comparison between the f4 and f2.8, including bokeh, and there is only a smidge of difference. In my case, a 2.8 will allow me to shoot at ISO1600 or less instead of 3200 or less.
 
R

Rick M

Senior Member
I think I have convinced myself to get the new Tamron VC 2.8, IQ and focus speed are reported to be excellent and it is about $1000 less than the Nikon VRII after taxes. I'll keep you posted on my progress. My wife just bought a new purse so I should be able to justify this :)
 
R

Rick M

Senior Member
fhibbs12 said:
Im in the same boat. I have a 1500 dollar buget. I either get the Nikon f4 or the new tamron 2.8. Weight is irrelavent to me....
Click to expand...

I've decided to ignor the weight issue now also and go for the 2.8, been struggling with this for a few months. My dealer just got the new tamron in and after seeing it yesterday I'm sold.
 
R

Rick M

Senior Member
NVSteve said:
Rick,

As you know, I will be trying out the new Tamron at some point against my f4. I may just end up keeping both. My only question to you is if you need quick focusing speed. I can live with or without VR/VC, but I absolutely need quick focusing along with the 2.8. From what I've read of the other 2.8 options, they aren't the speediest, nor are they sharp edge to edge (if that matters). One of the biggest reasons Sigma was never a consideration for me is that it has no weather sealing, nor does it have the O-ring on the mount. It is a tough call. I know Mansurov posted up a nice comparison between the f4 and f2.8, including bokeh, and there is only a smidge of difference. In my case, a 2.8 will allow me to shoot at ISO1600 or less instead of 3200 or less.
Click to expand...

Yea, after reading the reviews, focus speed was an issue with the older Tamron. I'll be interested to hear you're comparison between the two.
 
AC016

AC016

Senior Member
Rick M said:
I think I have convinced myself to get the new Tamron VC 2.8, IQ and focus speed are reported to be excellent and it is about $1000 less than the Nikon VRII after taxes. I'll keep you posted on my progress. My wife just bought a new purse so I should be able to justify this :)
Click to expand...

I think you will be happy. I am very happy with my Tamron :)
 
N

NVSteve

Senior Member
Rick M said:
I think I have convinced myself to get the new Tamron VC 2.8, IQ and focus speed are reported to be excellent and it is about $1000 less than the Nikon VRII after taxes. I'll keep you posted on my progress. My wife just bought a new purse so I should be able to justify this :)
Click to expand...

I'm looking forward to your findings. I saw it available for a short time yesterday on Amazon, but had to get some work done. By the time I went back to Amazon, it was out of stock again. No rush for me since my indoor shooting season is done until the fall. I'm hoping we'll start seeing some more reviews posted from the various photo sites.
 
R

Rick M

Senior Member
NVSteve said:
I'm looking forward to your findings. I saw it available for a short time yesterday on Amazon, but had to get some work done. By the time I went back to Amazon, it was out of stock again. No rush for me since my indoor shooting season is done until the fall. I'm hoping we'll start seeing some more reviews posted from the various photo sites.
Click to expand...

I'm basing my decision on mostly reviews for the Canon mount version (as far as user reviews). The DXO review is pretty solid too.
 
J

jwstl

Senior Member
I placed my order for the Nikon 70-200 f/4. I have the 80-200 2.8 when I need fast and now I'll have outstanding IQ in a travel friendly package.
 
Top