|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/23/2006 10:29:35 AM · #1 |
It's time to start thinking about a new lens... I'm in the market for a mid-long telephoto for my D50. I've got a few lenses in mind, and no matter what I read all three seem to be great lenses... so I'm after a little inside information here. I'm considering this lens purchase as a long term serious investment... Eventually I dream of being a reasonable photographer, so I'd like to have some equipment to make sure I get the best out of my shots, and while I'm young and stupid I intend to buy it :P.
I currently own the Nikkor 70-300... which is in its own right a fair lens. However, I've started to notice its pitfalls of late. Particularly in low light, it is SLOW. Most of my shooting is handheld so this is a bit of an issue.
The three lenses I have in mind are:
Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED
Reason - Price difference over the 70-200
Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 VR DG IF-ED
Reason - Peoples' praise for this lens is insatiable
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG APO IF for Nikon
Reason - Price again, plus, those who own it seem to be exceptionally happy folk
Any input would be greatly appreciated. I realise that I'm making a giant step over what I have with any of these lenses, but I want to make a purchase I won't replace.
Cheers in advance.
Dylan.
|
|
|
|
10/23/2006 10:33:51 AM · #2 |
| Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR no question!!! The Canon equivalent is my favourite lens. |
|
|
|
10/23/2006 10:39:52 AM · #3 |
I have the Sigma 70-200 2.8, and it is a fantastic lens--it's sharp even wide open at 2.8, contrasty, and has great build quality. I'd choose it over the Nikon 80-200, simply because the Sigma has "HSM" (Sigma's equivalent of Nikon's "AF-S" focusing). The Nikon 80-200 has the older screw-drive focusing, which is a bit slower.
Between the Nikon 70-200mm and the Sigma 70-200, the Nikon has VR and the Sigma does not, so if that is important to you, then go Nikon. However, I decided that I wouldn't be needing the VR function much (most of what I use the lens for is outdoors in daylight). Plus the Sigma is slightly shorter and slightly lighter than the Nikon 70-200. Plus, of course, the Sigma is about 1/2 the price ($800 cheaper), and that sealed the deal for me. |
|
|
|
10/23/2006 10:44:49 AM · #4 |
   
I have the 70-200 VR, the samples above are from that lens. Sure they are processed, but I had great quality to work with. Some of the motorcycle shots (lot more on pbase) had pretty slow shutterspeeds, so the VR kicked in to compensate for vertical movement only. Recently I have also used it for static shots where the shutterspeed dipped to 1/60s. The bike standing still photo is an example of that, here VR also helped a lot.
It is very sharp already at f/2.8, very good sharpness from f/4 and in all conditions great micro-contrast and bokeh. Incredibly fast focus, even from the other side of the focus scale. With one of the motorcycle shots it went from total blur to focussed faster than I could press the shutter button and that was while panning! Good build quality. It is my 2nd fav lens. My fav is my Sigma 30mm f/1.4
Sharpness wide-open, the contrast, bokeh and the VR were the things that made me decide to get this lens over the 80-200 (also very good, but no VR). The Sigma lacks a bit in every aspect, but the price is good. You get what you pay for.
|
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 01/07/2026 06:01:57 AM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2026 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 01/07/2026 06:01:57 AM EST.
|
