I've been shooting sports for my college newspaper which has been great but I really need a 70(80)-200 2.8 lens to be able to cover indoor and night games. I'm working to put myself through college and I can't afford to drop $2500 on a lens. Should I go 3rd party? (Tamron or Sigma?) Is there a way to get cheaper used glass reliably? Do you know someone selling this lens?
Suggestions for a 2.8 tele?
- Thread starter SAbbott
- Start date
LouCioccio
Senior Member
It really depends. Read the forums and reviews. I do own a Sigma zoom 18-50/2.8 that does macro (4-3rds body my other camera) I did not buy the copy the manufacture had as it was not a full 2.8 at the high end and I knew I would be at the high end over 50% of the time plus it did not do macro for hand and bouquet shots. Its sharp and I am pleased. On the other hand I too debated on the manufacture zoom and went with them but I still not sure if the Sigma would have been just as good. Buyers remorse...I don't know. So I would read the reviews and try to find images people that have taken with the combination body and lens.
Ciao,
Lou Cioccio
Ciao,
Lou Cioccio
maybe this will do the trick for you, $698. Still a lot of money, to be sure, but it looks to be in fantastic shape.
Nikon AI AF Zoom Nikkor 80 200mm F 2 8D Ed New Nikon SLR Camera Excellent 0018208019854 | eBay
Nikon AI AF Zoom Nikkor 80 200mm F 2 8D Ed New Nikon SLR Camera Excellent 0018208019854 | eBay
Last edited:
Buy a used version or get the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VRI since you are using DX.
\
Glenn,
Can you elaborate on that a little. I have been looking at VR1 and 11, but future plans of moving to FX. Why is VRI ok, is it not ok for FX ? I have seen this mentioned before but I dont recall being explained and I never asked.
Thanks,
Kevin
Vr1` doesn't vignette on DX...
Kevin - aside from vignette that Pedroj described, the VRI is not as sharp from corner to corner when using it with a FX camera. I had to go f4 just get a little more sharpness with my D700 before. When I sold my VRI and bought the VRII, I became much happier.
If you won't be shooting at night, consider the Nikon 70-200mm f4 VRIII. That's what I would do if I didn't have the VRII yet.
The main reason I have been thinking about this lens is because I shoot wrestling matches and outdoor sports under stadium lights. The 70-300 VR I have does really good during the day but not so good during low light, its the FX version and even thought about going FX to try to achieve better low light pictures. So looking for something that will fill the gap. The additional stop of the f4 would be nice, just not sure it would fill the gap.
I can fix most of the issues with post processing, but I don't think the IQ wold be as good as it would be going with better glass.
Just can't figure out which way to go.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I can fix most of the issues with post processing, but I don't think the IQ wold be as good as it would be going with better glass.
Just can't figure out which way to go.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Once you zoom in with that lens, you'll be shooting at f5.6 already and that is not good especially at 300mm. You'll need a stronger flash to help lower the ISO when shooting indoor.
Try the Nikon 180mm f2.8 lens to see if that is within the focal range that you are looking for. It is much cheaper.
Amazon.com: Nikon 180mm f/2.8D ED-IF AF Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: NIKON: Camera & Photo
Try the Nikon 180mm f2.8 lens to see if that is within the focal range that you are looking for. It is much cheaper.
Amazon.com: Nikon 180mm f/2.8D ED-IF AF Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: NIKON: Camera & Photo
I have been thinking about a lens like that as well. I can't use flash, so that makes it hard to get enough light. I think a lot of shots indoors hover around the 100mm mark, s a 180 would work. Thanks for the suggestions
I have even looked at 80-200 f/2.8 AF-D, just really need something that is fast low light capable and is FX. I plan to move to FX fairly soon.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I have even looked at 80-200 f/2.8 AF-D, just really need something that is fast low light capable and is FX. I plan to move to FX fairly soon.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Last edited:
But it's not AF-S so it's not the fastest focusing lens.
The OP's main concern is that his current lenses are not suitable for low light or indoor use. Have a f2.8 vs f5.6 is a huge difference. For wrestling games, it doesn't require much changing since they don't move as much unlike basketball.
You can sell your 70-300mm VRI and use those funds to either the Nikon 80-200mm f2.8 (two ring) or used Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VRI. The 80-200mm f2.8 can probably go around <$900 and the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VRI around $1,300.