70-200mm 2.8 : Nikon VR or Sigma or Tamron?

[daydreamz]

Hi. Just read on the Tamron website of their launch of the 70-200mm 2.8 lens...seems quite well equipped for this specs. Anyone tried it...any reviews, pricing info, feedback, market talk etc!? Just been trying the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 last few days and it's really nice...so if that is any yardstick then the 70-200mm cant be dismal in my opinion. (of course if budget no constraint then nikon seems like the best in this range specs)

Anyone can shed any more info...!?

Cheers.

 

[Yatlapball]

No marketing dept will allow their spec and feature sheet to look like a dismal failure. Heh.

It hasn't arrived on the market yet AFAIK... So be patient

 

[hacknet]

i'm looking at this lens too! there's a tokina on the bns too.. million dollar question is how much difference are there between them. i saw some test shots of the sigma and it gets sharp only after f/4. @ f/2.8 it is pretty blur all round.

i havent seen shots of the nikon thou..

 

[ihub88]

Hi. Just read on the Tamron website of their launch of the 70-200mm 2.8 lens...seems quite well equipped for this specs. Anyone tried it...any reviews, pricing info, feedback, market talk etc!? Just been trying the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 last few days and it's really nice...so if that is any yardstick then the 70-200mm cant be dismal in my opinion. (of course if budget no constraint then nikon seems like the best in this range specs)

Anyone can shed any more info...!?

Cheers.

well equiped meaning?

 

[scenar]

Only the Nikon has VR, if you intend to handhold the lens, this would be plenty useful. With good handholding technique, shutter speeds of 1/25 @ 200mm are actually possible.

While I haven't tried the other 70-200s yet, I would also tink it is hard to beat the AF speed of the nikon 70-200.

Sharpness wise, again, I guess it would be hard to do any better.
Here's a sample @ f3.2 http://zyy.smugmug.com/gallery/2480953#100772030-L-LB

 

[ZeroDivine]

the upcoming tamron 70-200mm sounds very promising. If the review is good and price is right, I won't hesitate to get this ...

 

[Hawaiisg]

sigma 70-200 2.8 ex dg hsm works great. although i use it for a canon, even at 2.8 the focus is good, for me it's not blur. i normally shoot sports so handshake not a problem since i shoot at higher speeds. to tell you the truth, this lens is really good if you dig up reviews on it you'll find heaps of others agree far more than disagree...but then again, no one lens is perfect anyway

have a good day

 

[Mendis]

Wa Scenar, beautiful olive back sunbird portrait! Dark side shooters nowadays, in the birding community, getting less...

 

[hacknet]

is the sigma HSM the only one in the lot that has a AF motor in the lens like the nikon AFS? i wonder how much faster it focus compared to the older 80-200mm afd one.

 

[daydreamz]

well equipped = good features, capabilities, etc (for the price that is...which is not known but assuming that it will be very competitive like their 17-50mm 2.8 offering)

well equiped meaning?

 

[daydreamz]

wow scenar...some of your pics are really amazing...always such a delight to view them & learn. :thumbsup:

 

[daydreamz]

Hi Hawaii, just spoke with a mate over the weekend who had the Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 and you're right...he too swears by it...great performer as per him. Well...since Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 is new and given that I am so happy with the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8, I am thinking i should wait & give the Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 a try as & when it is released in Singapore...!! sluurrpp...cant wait...itchy fingers! ;p (or if anyone is visiting the USA Japan etc then I might tell them to buy one copy for me, warranty or not!)

sigma 70-200 2.8 ex dg hsm works great. although i use it for a canon, even at 2.8 the focus is good, for me it's not blur. i normally shoot sports so handshake not a problem since i shoot at higher speeds. to tell you the truth, this lens is really good if you dig up reviews on it you'll find heaps of others agree far more than disagree...but then again, no one lens is perfect anyway

have a good day

 

[hacknet]

how much cheaper is the sigma compared to the nikon?

 

[daydreamz]

Sigma = $1550+ & Nikon = $2600+ and Tamron unknown yet!

how much cheaper is the sigma compared to the nikon?

 

[Yatlapball]

Does the sigma peeling coating problem extend to the 70-200 as well? (or its an all EX lenses suffer the same problem thing. heh.)

 

[hacknet]

whoa.. for the sigma at $1550 is there optical stablization?

 

[Yatlapball]

No there is not. Only HSM.

 

[esmondng]

whoa.. for the sigma at $1550 is there optical stablization?

who knows man. wif the tamron one coming out maybe sigma may put their OS into their 70-200 to make it more competitive! lets see keke.:sweat:

 

[hacknet]

without OS, for $1550 i would buy nikon. why scrimp on a 3rd party lens when the ledgendary 80-200mm f2.8 afd costs alittle bit more..

 

[daydreamz]

Guys the $1550 price for the Sigma is from the Nikon price guide thread which is usually always more or less accurate.

However in this case there may be an error as my friend who bought the Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 says it is about $900 (he actually did buy one in CS long ago)....so there is some confusion and I have not personally checked in a shop etc. Maybe anyone here who knows or has bought this lens can clarify...?!