DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> $700 to buy a lens
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 21 of 21, (reverse)
AuthorThread
12/19/2008 12:22:43 PM · #1
I need help buying a lens.

Take a look at my profile - the lens I'd like to replace is the Tamron 28-75mm.
I'll sell it ... but then get what?
I had the 18-200 Nikon but the lens creep bothered me more than I could have imagined.

Perhaps the Sigma?

I guess I'm looking for an all-around with enough zoom to photograph a stage from the seats.

Any thoughts? (I'd prefer to spend 700$ or less).

This is what I'm thinkin'

Message edited by author 2008-12-19 12:26:48.
12/19/2008 12:32:02 PM · #2
you have a good lens, fast too. If the stage is well lit a slower (as in 4-5.6) lens might work but it will have a harder time focusing.

What about a 100mm prime like a 2.8 'macro' lens (and keep your 28-75).

The 18-200 won't do any better IMO than a $150 or $200 sigma 70-300 4-5.6 APO zoom, and perhaps worse as some of the 18-200's are 6.3 max ap on the long end.

What you need is a 70-200 2.8 VR...but you'll need a good bit more than $700 to get it.
12/19/2008 12:41:06 PM · #3
Yeah trust me, you want a high fstop if you are photographing stage, it is almost ALWAYS low light. I find I never go abot 2.5-3.5 fstop unless I am doing a photo of the who stage and not close ups. Close ups stay in the 2-2.8 range for me. You want to go for faster lenses. The 100mm 2.8 is a good choice except that 100mm might not bring you in close enough.

I don't ever buy non canon lenses so I don't know how good these are, but they seem like better ranges and speed for your purposes:
//www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0000501U0/dpchallenge-20
//www.amazon.com/Tamron-70-200mm-Macro-Digital-Cameras/dp/B0012GLHL2/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1229708388&sr=8-1
//www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000053HBB/dpchallenge-20

You might look at some reviews to see how those are.

Claire

Message edited by author 2008-12-19 12:41:23.
12/19/2008 12:43:35 PM · #4
I agree with ' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', '/') + 1) . ' Prof_Fate, what you really need for shooting concerts is a 70-200 2.8 VR, but of course you won't get one for $700. You might consider a 80-200 2.8. No VR, focuses slower than the 70-200, but excellent optically, and 2.8 all the way through the zoom range. You could certainly find a used one for $700.
12/19/2008 12:58:35 PM · #5
This lens might work well if you can get by without zoom:

//www.dpchallenge.com/lens.php?LENS_ID=270

They are sometimes still available new and fairly easy to find on eBay or other places.
In fact, I've got one I'd give up in excellent condition for 4 Cnotes US. LOL Lack of zoom would probably kill you on this one however.
12/19/2008 01:11:08 PM · #6
Probably NOT what you want to hear, but save your monies and wait on the VR. You'll hate the wait, but you'll sure be happy that you bought good glass in the end. With $700, you're almost halfway there. TRUST ME, buy good glass...ALWAYS.

E
12/19/2008 01:14:27 PM · #7
Originally posted by ericwoo:

buy good glass...ALWAYS.

E


I'll backup Eric on this. Don't do things half way just because you have some money now. Figure out the need, choose the lens, save up $$$.
12/19/2008 01:15:54 PM · #8
Originally posted by metatate:

Take a look at my profile - the lens I'd like to replace is the Tamron 28-75mm.


Are you out of your mind? Dollar-for-dollar that lens is absolutely one of the best values on the market. It's fast, it's versatile, it has excellent optical performance...

Looks to me like you're in a good position, lineup wise, to invest in a 200mm prime...

R.
12/19/2008 01:20:55 PM · #9
Yeah ...
The Nikon 70-200 is the one I REALLY want ...
but I have other priorities right now. If I continue to sell stock at the rate I have been going, I could get there in a year - but there's no telling.

Originally posted by Nikolai1024:

Originally posted by ericwoo:

buy good glass...ALWAYS.

E


I'll backup Eric on this. Don't do things half way just because you have some money now. Figure out the need, choose the lens, save up $$$.
12/19/2008 01:33:15 PM · #10
Does Nikon have a 135F2 in that price range. Whenever I shoot stage there are two bodies and two lens. One is the 85 F1.8 and the other is the 135F2. These will get me fast and will get me long enough. If I need to get wider.........well I have feet.

Matt
12/19/2008 01:53:31 PM · #11
Phil gives in depth reviews of these ... it looks like the motor on the sigma is the thing that might make the sigma better friends with the D300's capabiolities yet image quality won't be as goof as Tamron or of course the Nikon.

sigma 70-200
Tammy
12/19/2008 02:09:19 PM · #12
pffft, this is all old tech... $700 is plenty of money for a long fast lens.

Start with a 50mm/1.8, only like what $120?

That leaves $580! Now buy 19 UV filters, the nice clear ones. Don't get any low profile ones, those are overpriced and won't work as well. Stick em all on the front.
Now you have a long 1.8 for a fraction of the cost of anyone's suggestions so far.
12/19/2008 02:42:56 PM · #13
Why not the Tammy 18-270mm? It has Vibration Control.. sure its a bit slow.. but I have heard good reviews about it. The one catch might be slow AF.

ETA: Or the 70-300mm VR? IF you look at its distortion and framewide sharpness test charts, its much better and more consistent across almost the whole focal range compared to the NIkon 18-200mm VR that Ken Rockwell raves about;-) Plus they say its sharp. I recently ordered it.

Message edited by author 2008-12-19 14:47:11.
12/19/2008 03:25:51 PM · #14
I was going to recommend this one. Then I noticed that you live on the wrong side of the tracks:)
Sigma 150
12/19/2008 04:06:07 PM · #15
The Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8 is $999 at Ritz Camera.

I use them for standard street pricing 'cause that gives me a known.

You can always figure someone in a WD or with a special will beat their everyday price by 20-35%.

I'd recommend renting one to try, or at least trying one on your camera in a store somewhere before you make any decision.

After your Tammy 28-75, you probably won't be happy with anything of lesser quality.
12/19/2008 10:50:48 PM · #16
Hi Tate,

I took some shots in the theater with my Tamron 28-75. I was on the long end, but ended up with decent framing from the orchestra pit (~15 feet away from the stage). Stage lights seemed bright, but I was still at f/3.5, ISO 2000.

So it really depends on the range you want:
- If you want to replace your Tamron 28-70 with a similar range, I would think something with an ultra-sonic motor would be good.
- If you want all around, an 18-200 might suite you, though you'll probably not get the very best optics or focus speed.
- If you want the longer range, go for an affordable 70-200 f/2.8, like the Sigma. I know a guy selling one used for $500. I almost bought it, but am optiong for a cheaper AF 70-210 f/4, and I'll buy some SB-600's with the leftover.

-Jeff
12/19/2008 10:57:11 PM · #17
Oh, and Nikon has made many versions of their 80-200/70-200 f/2.8 and you can pick up some of the older versions for your price range.
12/19/2008 11:11:25 PM · #18
I have the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 on my D200 and it's a great lens for the price. Like you, I also really wanted the Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR, but I could save about $1k if I gave up VR and settled with slightly lower image quality. To me, that made sense, so I went with it and have never looked back.
12/23/2008 11:34:15 PM · #19
I just read this after the fact but I plan on renting this one over Christmas (80-200).
My wife and child are performing in the church dis-play of Mary and Jesus (30 seconds or something like that - but what the heck, I'm up for the challenge). We;ll see ... hopefully I won't get addicted to the lens - or drop it ;)

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

The Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8 is $999 at Ritz Camera.

I use them for standard street pricing 'cause that gives me a known.

You can always figure someone in a WD or with a special will beat their everyday price by 20-35%.

I'd recommend renting one to try, or at least trying one on your camera in a store somewhere before you make any decision.

After your Tammy 28-75, you probably won't be happy with anything of lesser quality.

12/24/2008 01:40:29 PM · #20
Originally posted by smurfguy:

Oh, and Nikon has made many versions of their 80-200/70-200 f/2.8 and you can pick up some of the older versions for your price range.


I see the current version 80-200 come up on craigslist for $700 pretty regularly. At least here in San Diego. When I had an older 80-200 to sell, I was only able to get $550 for it (the middle one, with the push-pull zoom and the modern limit switch). YMMV according to local conditions, of course.

fwiw, the older 80-200 I had focused slower than the current model. My biggest complaint about the current 80-200 is the focusing speed, especially when focusing on stuff that's fairly close. If you're shooting things at a distance, though, an older one might be okay.

All the 80-200's are excellent optically, though.
12/24/2008 01:55:28 PM · #21
sigma 70-200 f2.8 is a good lense and can usually be had in or below the price you mentioned
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 11/18/2019 11:39:57 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2019 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 11/18/2019 11:39:57 AM EST.