NIKKOR AF-S 70-200mm f/4G ED VR or Tamron SP 70-200MM F/2.8 Di VC USD


supercool

New Member
May 20, 2009
335
0
0
#1
Hi Brothers and Sisters,

I'm comparing between 2 lens above to buy and can't make up my mind which one to go. Both of them give same focal length but one is more faster than the other. Should I go for faster lens with heavy weight? My purpose of buying this lens is to take street shots and some sport actions (mostly outdoor).
 

nicorn

New Member
May 4, 2011
389
0
0
#2
Actually for me also, m thinking of getting a 70-200 also.

Was thinking between 70-200f4 also and the 70-200f2.8 vr I. Still can't decide what to get. And now tamron have 70-200 vc.

So now still deciding what to get. F4, f2.8 vr I or tamron.

Hard decision.
 

nicorn

New Member
May 4, 2011
389
0
0
#3
Hi Brothers and Sisters,

I'm comparing between 2 lens above to buy and can't make up my mind which one to go. Both of them give same focal length but one is more faster than the other. Should I go for faster lens with heavy weight? My purpose of buying this lens is to take street shots and some sport actions (mostly outdoor).
Actually if u needed it for sport you should get 2.8. The price diff is not that big also.
 

supercool

New Member
May 20, 2009
335
0
0
#4
Actually for me also, m thinking of getting a 70-200 also.

Was thinking between 70-200f4 also and the 70-200f2.8 vr I. Still can't decide what to get. And now tamron have 70-200 vc.

So now still deciding what to get. F4, f2.8 vr I or tamron.

Hard decision.
Yes, it's a very hard to decide :confused:
Actually if u needed it for sport you should get 2.8. The price diff is not that big also.
That is what I thought for. Check yesterday with most of camera shops and most of them don't have stock for Nikon mount. Price is about S$2000 +/- depends on payment mode. But for Nikkor, price is about S$1700 +/- but stock not sure as I didn't ask yesterday.
 

nicorn

New Member
May 4, 2011
389
0
0
#5
Yes, it's a very hard to decide :confused:


That is what I thought for. Check yesterday with most of camera shops and most of them don't have stock for Nikon mount. Price is about S$2000 +/- depends on payment mode. But for Nikkor, price is about S$1700 +/- but stock not sure as I didn't ask yesterday.
Oic that's why I hold on my purchase of 2nd hand 70-200 vr I, 1.7-1.6k. Might be topping up for tamron if not a f4
 

Blur Shadow

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2005
4,886
4
0
#6
It is never easy selecting the lenses, especially with the fresh developments from the third party manufacturers.

If you are a casual user, then I think both will do a fine job.

If you are a professional user, then you will have to evaluate your shooting style to determine which is better for you. Then, you have to figure out the reliability of the lenses and your risk mitigation factors if such lenses are crucial for your work.
 

Hacker

Senior Member
Dec 6, 2005
4,239
1
0
Cyberspace
#7
Hi Brothers and Sisters,

I'm comparing between 2 lens above to buy and can't make up my mind which one to go. Both of them give same focal length but one is more faster than the other. Should I go for faster lens with heavy weight? My purpose of buying this lens is to take street shots and some sport actions (mostly outdoor).
For sports, a faster aperture is always preferred. The Nikon f2.8 VR II is your best bet. Size wise, the Nikon f4 is only marginally smaller, but definitely lighter. Take out the hood and the tripod mount, and you can see what I mean.
 

nicorn

New Member
May 4, 2011
389
0
0
#8
After thinking for awhile, will get either get nikon 70-200 vr I or the tamron 70-200 vc if not maybe a sigma 70-200 os.. Think think
 

Last edited:

supercool

New Member
May 20, 2009
335
0
0
#9
It is never easy selecting the lenses, especially with the fresh developments from the third party manufacturers.

If you are a casual user, then I think both will do a fine job.

If you are a professional user, then you will have to evaluate your shooting style to determine which is better for you. Then, you have to figure out the reliability of the lenses and your risk mitigation factors if such lenses are crucial for your work.
Thanks for comment Blur Shadow. Actually I'm just a casual user and that is why I'm not thinking to get Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 which I think is over kill for me in term of $$$. Most likely I'll wait for the Tamron Nikon mount to be available here and take it.

After thinking for awhile, will get either get nikon 70-200 vr I or the tamron 70-200 vc if not maybe a sigma 70-200 os.. Think think
If you can wait, I think it is worth to wait for Tamron. :thumbsup:
 

daredevil123

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 25, 2005
21,652
66
48
lil red dot
#10
For a few hundred more... just go with the VRII... it is a whole world of difference.
 

supercool

New Member
May 20, 2009
335
0
0
#11
For sports, a faster aperture is always preferred. The Nikon f2.8 VR II is your best bet. Size wise, the Nikon f4 is only marginally smaller, but definitely lighter. Take out the hood and the tripod mount, and you can see what I mean.
Thanks for your comment Hacker. 2.8 VR II is out of my budget as I'm just a casual shooter...
 

supercool

New Member
May 20, 2009
335
0
0
#12
For a few hundred more... just go with the VRII... it is a whole world of difference.
You mean spend a few hundred more and get pre-own Nikon 2.8 VR II?

At first, I set my budget around $1500 and buy pre-own Nikon 2.8 VR I. Than found out that if I spend a few hundred more, can get Nikon f/4 VR III brand new. So look for f/4. Again found out that if I spend a few hundred more, I can get Tamron f/2.8. And that's where all the confusion start coming :confused:

But I can't spend more than $2000 as that is my maximum limit already :(
 

Last edited:

daredevil123

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 25, 2005
21,652
66
48
lil red dot
#13
You mean spend a few hundred more and get pre-own Nikon 2.8 VR II?

At first, I set my budget around $1500 and buy pre-own Nikon 2.8 VR I. Than found out that if I spend a few hundred more, can get Nikon f/4 VR III brand new. So look for f/4. Again found out that if I spend a few hundred more, I can get Tamron f/2.8. And that's where all the confusion start coming :confused:

But I can't spend more than $2000 as that is my maximum limit already :(
Save a couple more months, and I am sure you can get the VRII pre-owned. Sigma OS HSM performance is around the same as the VRI. A good copy VRI cost around 1.7k. A new grey Sigma cost around 1.5k. A F4 cost 2k. A pre-owned VRII cost around 2.6k. 600 more. Save a few more months and you can own the best.... and you never need to sell and upgrade again, and never need to think twice about the "what-ifs". I went through the same thought process as you before. I actually put in an order for a grey sigma OS HSM. But luckily the set came with a problem right out of the box... after the 2nd try, I just spend the money and get the VRII. best decision I made.

And a pre-owned VRII will hold its value much better. Try selling the Sigma and you will know what I mean. And as new sensors get better and better with higher resolution, the VRI will fall out of favor very very soon. And in time, will be hard to sell also. And the VRII works very well with TCs retaining very good IQ... so if you are into sports or long range subjects, you might want to factor that in too.

BTW, I have nothing against older lenses or Sigma lenses. I own some old Nikkor glass as well as 3 pieces of Sigma lenses. But for the 70-200, there is no comparison.
 

Last edited:

Blur Shadow

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2005
4,886
4
0
#14
Better yet. Buy a brand new 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII in Hong Kong. Priced at significantly below S$3,000 after conversion, I don't see why anyone is buying the lens locally.

Because the original consideration was between the new Tamron and the Nikon f/4 telephoto zoom lenses, I thought both are fine. But yes, I concur that the Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII is definitely a winner. The only reason to consider the f/4 is if you are concerned with the weight and/or bulk.
 

bomby929

Senior Member
Feb 18, 2008
595
0
16
#15
Blur Shadow said:
Better yet. Buy a brand new 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII in Hong Kong. Priced at significantly below S$3,000 after conversion, I don't see why anyone is buying the lens locally.

Because the original consideration was between the new Tamron and the Nikon f/4 telephoto zoom lenses, I thought both are fine. But yes, I concur that the Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII is definitely a winner. The only reason to consider the f/4 is if you are concerned with the weight and/or bulk.
My main considerations for getting the keeping the nikon f4 is the weight.

Previously try the vr2. It's a bit too heavy at 1.5kg.

For me normally I carry depending on what I shoot either wide 14-24 + 24-70 f2.8 + a fast prime or 24-70 + 70-200 + a fast prime. Tried the vr 2 version it's so heavy that I personally find it difficult to bring around.

When the f4 came, gave it a try, now a days I have no issue bringing this lite weight and super iq lens out anytime.

But if you shoot sport f2.8 is always welcome. But for sport normally u do not walk around so it still quite ok I guess.
 

daredevil123

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 25, 2005
21,652
66
48
lil red dot
#16
My main considerations for getting the keeping the nikon f4 is the weight.

Previously try the vr2. It's a bit too heavy at 1.5kg.

For me normally I carry depending on what I shoot either wide 14-24 + 24-70 f2.8 + a fast prime or 24-70 + 70-200 + a fast prime. Tried the vr 2 version it's so heavy that I personally find it difficult to bring around.

When the f4 came, gave it a try, now a days I have no issue bringing this lite weight and super iq lens out anytime.

But if you shoot sport f2.8 is always welcome. But for sport normally u do not walk around so it still quite ok I guess.
Many sports shooters move around a lot actually.

Thing is, if you just need reach, the F4 is a good consideration. But when you need 2.8 you need 2.8.
 

Hacker

Senior Member
Dec 6, 2005
4,239
1
0
Cyberspace
#17
If you are a casual shooter, than get the VR I. Otherwise, rent till you save for the VR II. If picture quality is not important, any lens will do. Unless you have a camera with great low light capability, f/2.8 can make a different between getting the shot and not getting it.
 

Jan 26, 2002
521
1
0
Singapore
#18
I say go NSC try out nikon f2.8 vs f4 weight difference. Personally I'll never consider taking f2.8 out for casual street shoot just on weight alone.

Then next is still want f2.8 or f4. If so, I say wait for Tamron to be out. Only then consider if want to get a vr1, sigma or tamron; esp since some will be selling theirs..
 

Aug 28, 2008
590
0
0
singapore, northeast
#20
You mean spend a few hundred more and get pre-own Nikon 2.8 VR II?

At first, I set my budget around $1500 and buy pre-own Nikon 2.8 VR I. Than found out that if I spend a few hundred more, can get Nikon f/4 VR III brand new. So look for f/4. Again found out that if I spend a few hundred more, I can get Tamron f/2.8. And that's where all the confusion start coming :confused:

But I can't spend more than $2000 as that is my maximum limit already :(
imho get the nikkor 70~200mm f4g. its Nano coated. which you will never be able to obtain the IQ that tamron F2.8 can offer u . ╰_╯
 

Top Bottom