Third Part Lens: Tamron or Sigma :70-200mm 2.8 and 24-70mm 2.8?

O

ohh.justin

Senior Member
After I get my Nikon D700 back from Nikon after dropping it ( the strap snapped on Christmas day and fell right into the cement $600 repair :() Im hoping to get a new telephoto lens. I've read so many reviews I really can't decide. I'll be using it mainly for sports and weddings, so I need something with a fast auto focus as well as a sharp image. Any advice would be great. Thanks!!
 
M

Mfrankfort

Senior Member
Never used it, but also heard it's MUCH lighter than the 2.8. Unless you REALLY need the speed of the 2.8, that's a much more economical option.
 
G

gqtuazon

Gear Head
ohh.justin said:
After I get my Nikon D700 back from Nikon after dropping it ( the strap snapped on Christmas day and fell right into the cement $600 repair :() Im hoping to get a new telephoto lens. I've read so many reviews I really can't decide. I'll be using it mainly for sports and weddings, so I need something with a fast auto focus as well as a sharp image. Any advice would be great. Thanks!!
Click to expand...

Can't really say except that either lenses are much lighter compared to the Nikon zoom f2.8 counter part. I've seen test side by side images between the Sigma and Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VRII and it was very obvious to me on how sharper the images were on the Nikon. The person later sold his Sigma and kept the Nikon. I am not over hyping Nikon but in this case, it is true. Same goes with the AF.

So the compromise if you get 3rd party zoom lenses are: you get less sharper images (but maybe sharp enough after stopping down) and slower AF but you get to save some cash and a lighter set-up with either Tamron or Sigma.

FYI, I used to own the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VRI and I replaced that one with the newer VRII since it is much sharper across the full frame. The VRI was more optimized and works very well with DX cameras. It works on FX too but I am a pixel peeper. :eek:
 
Top