70-300mm F4-5.6 Question

dawgbyte77 · 8th April 2005

So far I have the kit lens 18-70mm and 50mm F1.8. All I need is a zoom lens and my "lens set" is complete. Anyone here have comments on different brands of lenses?

(1) Nikon (2) Tamron (3) Sigma?

I heard that Nikon is 90% Tamron and rumor has it that Nikon is Tamron OEM kinda thing. I'm also inclined to the macro of Tamron.

Also, I'm thinking of using it for a friend's wedding and maybe indoors. So my next question is, what is the significant advantages of 70-200mm F2.8 over this lens in terms of usage? I like the longer range but will the F4 be good enough to use indoors with sharp and good color?

espn · 8th April 2005

1) Definitely Nikkor.

Nikon produces their own glasses, their technology for ED is trademarked I believe (or issit copyright?). I don't think Nikkor is made up of Tamron.

There are major advantages in terms of glass build, weight, colours, sharpness, contrast, DOF of a 70-200 f/2.8 vs a 70-300 f/4-5.6.

f/4 is only available at the wide side, ie, 70mm to about 90 whereby it should become f/4.5 already, at 300mm it will become f/5.6. So if you want to shoot at f/4, effectively you're limited to 70-90+mm.

For the 70-200 f/2.8, it's constant f/2.8 from 70 to 200mm.

dawgbyte77 · 8th April 2005

Thanks. Still considering very hard to decide between sharp (200mm) or power (300mm).. Last thing I want to to get saddled by so many equipment. I'm still more inclined to quality (200mm). Hmm.. Thanks.

espn · 8th April 2005

I don't think it's necessary to 'complete' your set, this is not Diablo2 or something, what I think you should get is based on needs, else you will end up selling your gears away.

Else, you will end up lugging all your 'complete' set of equipment out everytime for a shoot or even casual walkabout.

timlim · 8th April 2005

i've used the nikon 70-300 f4-5.6 G for a few years now and the sharpness is pretty decent for normal use (personal, subjective opinion). it's very affordable (under $200 new in B&S), but you might want to keep in mind:

1) auto-focussing speed is rather slow (compared to SWM kit lens), and the lens tends to hunt a lot, but this also depends on your SLR's focussing abilities.

2) at the higher zoom range (eg 300mm) you really need to factor in camera shake and shutter speed. something to think about if you're going to shoot handheld in not so bright conditions. VR plus f2.8 in the 70-200 lens will help, of course, but you're looking at more than 10-15x the price!

3) it's very light, but the downside is that build quality does not feel that solid.

4) how about looking at 70-200 2.8 with teleconverter to push it up to 300 and beyond?

wainism · 8th April 2005

i have used the SIGMA 70-300 APO MACRO SUPER II
advantages :
1. doubles up a macro lens(200-300mm)
2. lighter
3. VERY much cheaper(abt $280-300 2nd hand)
disadvantages :
1. not as wide open as the 70-200(hence low light might not perform as well)
2. not as sharp
3. focus not as fast
4. build looks abit cheapskate
5. focus ring abit filmsy

dawgbyte77 · 8th April 2005

Thanks for the feedback guys. Specially the Sigma feedback. I think cheapskate looking has its advantage if you go to thief-prone areas. Anyway, it seems 70-200 is a better choice if I prefer sharp and low-light (i.e. wedding). Anyone here used 70-300 inside church? Is 70-200 zoom good enough for wedding without interfering?

wibawa · 8th April 2005

Agree with espn, choose Nikon ED one.
It's not that much more expensive...

All my lenses are now Nikon ED, except 50 f/1.8.

This link shows what Nikon 70-300 ED produce in good hand (not mine lah):
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/206191/0

My sample from recent shows:
Model

If you want macro, just attach 5T or 6T.

Originally Posted by espn

1) Definitely Nikkor.

Nikon produces their own glasses, their technology for ED is trademarked I believe (or issit copyright?). I don't think Nikkor is made up of Tamron.

There are major advantages in terms of glass build, weight, colours, sharpness, contrast, DOF of a 70-200 f/2.8 vs a 70-300 f/4-5.6.

f/4 is only available at the wide side, ie, 70mm to about 90 whereby it should become f/4.5 already, at 300mm it will become f/5.6. So if you want to shoot at f/4, effectively you're limited to 70-90+mm.

For the 70-200 f/2.8, it's constant f/2.8 from 70 to 200mm.

dawgbyte77 · 8th April 2005

Originally Posted by wibawa

Agree with espn, choose Nikon ED one.
It's not that much more expensive...
All my lenses are now Nikon ED, except 50 f/1.8.

This link shows what Nikon 70-300 ED produce in good hand (not mine lah):
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/206191/0

My sample from recent shows:
Model

If you want macro, just attach 5T or 6T.

Wow! The birds are so sharp and crisp. Cannot see your photo except for the head (think my connection got problem) but the flesh tone and bokeh is nice. How much is the new lens? Checked Nikon website and the list price is $745.

rayshade · 9th April 2005

Unless u are not allowed to stand close to your subject, long tele zoom will become useful, that may not be the case for most weddings. Wider zoom should give u more coverage for the scene, the kit lens along with the occasional use of 50mm lens for weddings works well for me. The disadvantage for long telezoom falls short with using flash, neither the SB600 or 800 will not serve u within the full zoom range.

I bought the 80-200AFD/2.8 brand new recently that cost almost half of the price of 70-200VR. Even without the VR technology, 80-200/f2.8AFD is still pretty darn amazing, somehow I still feel D lenses have a better physical built than G. 70-300 advantage is with the cheap price tag and weight, good to start with for a basic setup.

espn · 9th April 2005

Frankly, a 70-200 is the last piece of equipment I would use for wedding shoots, I'd prefer anything from 17mm to 105mm and preferrably not too obstrusive or attention seeking...

dawgbyte77 · 9th April 2005

Thanks Rayshade and espn... now I'm back to square 1. =) I think I'll postpone zoom lens till later. I'm also concern about the flash... but I thought "D" in 70-300mm stands for Distance and suppose to be beneficial to the flash? Anyway, I think its premature for me to buy if this is not really good for weddings. Thanks!

wind30 · 9th April 2005

I am also looking for a cheap and small (ard $500) zoom lens around 70-200.

Thinking of getting the 70-300 ED but some reviews err not so good. Can we find any older similar models anywhere in singapore like the 70-210mm? or other brands?

8th April 2005	#1
dawgbyte77 Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,066	70-300mm F4-5.6 Question So far I have the kit lens 18-70mm and 50mm F1.8. All I need is a zoom lens and my "lens set" is complete. Anyone here have comments on different brands of lenses? (1) Nikon (2) Tamron (3) Sigma? I heard that Nikon is 90% Tamron and rumor has it that Nikon is Tamron OEM kinda thing. I'm also inclined to the macro of Tamron. Also, I'm thinking of using it for a friend's wedding and maybe indoors. So my next question is, what is the significant advantages of 70-200mm F2.8 over this lens in terms of usage? I like the longer range but will the F4 be good enough to use indoors with sharp and good color?

8th April 2005	#2
espn Deregistered Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Planet Nikon Posts: 22,045	1) Definitely Nikkor. Nikon produces their own glasses, their technology for ED is trademarked I believe (or issit copyright?). I don't think Nikkor is made up of Tamron. There are major advantages in terms of glass build, weight, colours, sharpness, contrast, DOF of a 70-200 f/2.8 vs a 70-300 f/4-5.6. f/4 is only available at the wide side, ie, 70mm to about 90 whereby it should become f/4.5 already, at 300mm it will become f/5.6. So if you want to shoot at f/4, effectively you're limited to 70-90+mm. For the 70-200 f/2.8, it's constant f/2.8 from 70 to 200mm.

8th April 2005	#5
timlim Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 529	i've used the nikon 70-300 f4-5.6 G for a few years now and the sharpness is pretty decent for normal use (personal, subjective opinion). it's very affordable (under $200 new in B&S), but you might want to keep in mind: 1) auto-focussing speed is rather slow (compared to SWM kit lens), and the lens tends to hunt a lot, but this also depends on your SLR's focussing abilities. 2) at the higher zoom range (eg 300mm) you really need to factor in camera shake and shutter speed. something to think about if you're going to shoot handheld in not so bright conditions. VR plus f2.8 in the 70-200 lens will help, of course, but you're looking at more than 10-15x the price! 3) it's very light, but the downside is that build quality does not feel that solid. 4) how about looking at 70-200 2.8 with teleconverter to push it up to 300 and beyond?

8th April 2005	#6
wainism Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Beeshan Posts: 1,817	i have used the SIGMA 70-300 APO MACRO SUPER II advantages : 1. doubles up a macro lens(200-300mm) 2. lighter 3. VERY much cheaper(abt $280-300 2nd hand) disadvantages : 1. not as wide open as the 70-200(hence low light might not perform as well) 2. not as sharp 3. focus not as fast 4. build looks abit cheapskate 5. focus ring abit filmsy

9th April 2005	#10
rayshade Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 335	Unless u are not allowed to stand close to your subject, long tele zoom will become useful, that may not be the case for most weddings. Wider zoom should give u more coverage for the scene, the kit lens along with the occasional use of 50mm lens for weddings works well for me. The disadvantage for long telezoom falls short with using flash, neither the SB600 or 800 will not serve u within the full zoom range. I bought the 80-200AFD/2.8 brand new recently that cost almost half of the price of 70-200VR. Even without the VR technology, 80-200/f2.8AFD is still pretty darn amazing, somehow I still feel D lenses have a better physical built than G. 70-300 advantage is with the cheap price tag and weight, good to start with for a basic setup.

9th April 2005	#13
wind30 Deregistered Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 2,929	I am also looking for a cheap and small (ard $500) zoom lens around 70-200. Thinking of getting the 70-300 ED but some reviews err not so good. Can we find any older similar models anywhere in singapore like the 70-210mm? or other brands?