Please help to decide on Nikon telephoto lens


Status
Not open for further replies.
Oct 26, 2009
459
2
18
Red Dot Island
#1
Dear CSers,

I am usiing D7K and need a telephoto lens to complete the lens building as a hobbyist. I have read so many comparison here from Nikon to Tamron and Sigma. The more I read the more I do not what to decide. So I decided to play safe, I wanted Nikon lens only.

Could you please advise which of the following lens i should get to complete my buying.

70-300, 80-200, 28-300, 80-400 or the most obvious 70-200. I hesitate to go for 70-200 because it is the most expensive option and I really prefer a 300mm range or higher lens. I have to be honest here also, that I will seldom using this lens, that is why I hesitate to invest with a S$2,9xx for the 70-200 VR lens unless all are for this lens then I will go for it.

One option I will consider is the Sigma 70-200 if the above options are wasting money and not as sharp as Sigma. If not I prefer the Nikon lens and intend to move into FF a year or so later.

Thank you in advance.

p.s. I think I will use this lens more outdoor than in-door. Please correct me if the 24-70mm is not enough to cover in-door for normal event function or wedding etc. No modeling shooting for me. No such chances.
 

Last edited:

SnagIt

Senior Member
Aug 27, 2010
521
0
16
33
#2
If you seldom use it, I suggest you not to buy at all! Or else the lens will eventually be in BnS section. and the idea of "need a telephoto lens to complete the lens building as a hobbyist" is so wrong. You buy it when you need it unless you have too much money.

If you insist, of the lens you listed, it's consideration of F2.8 vs bigger F. Consider this first. F2.8 definitely has advantage in low light condition. If F 2.8 is not a must then any of the lens you listed will be fine. I personally would go for 70-300 VR cos it's almost as good as 70-200 in good light condition
 

baggiolee

New Member
Dec 7, 2006
1,748
0
0
www.facebook.com
#3
i recommend nikkor afs 70-300 vr, light, cheap and good IQ.

nikkor 70-200 f2.8 will be the best if u don't mind the cost and weight. but then again, since u seldom use tele lens, no point buying this lens.
 

Last edited:

Irvine

Senior Member
Jan 1, 2010
1,037
0
36
North? South? East? West?
#4
like wad others said, since u will seldom use a telephoto lens, might as well dun buy at all. it is a complete waste of money to me when u can use that amount of money on somethin even more meaningful
 

ecurbw

New Member
Jan 27, 2011
153
0
0
#5
Get a tamron 18-270mm?
 

Oct 26, 2009
459
2
18
Red Dot Island
#6
Thank you SnagIt, baggiolee, Irvine and ecurbw,

I did consider the Tamron 18-270 but it is a DX lens and I like the idea that it has Macro, but when I saw the barrel extended so long in 270mm I wipe it off from my list right away. 105mm is a good macro lens I already have and is using it to go out with the NPSS group for macro photo. I plan to go on to FF body that is why I try to buy FX lens if possible.

I can not define the seldom use is really how often, but I do have occassion like at Office function and Chingay I find it my 24-70mm not long enough. I do not think the lighting are ideal also. I do not see I will use more than 12 times a year. I thought of buying the 28-300mm for my April travel to Japan with my wife, but some in CS forum said this is a good lens and some said it is not a good lens. So I confuse because both are Nikon D90 users.

I do not have money to waste that is why I try to keep away from 70-200mm which is the most expensive zoom lens I have listed. If most opinion says I should take the pain and buy with no regret then I most likely will go for it.

Therefore you honest opinions will influence my final decision. A Funan higher level reputed shop recommended me 80-200 or 70-300 but I do not like the Sigma 150-500 recommended by them. I walked out empty handed.
 

Last edited:

baggiolee

New Member
Dec 7, 2006
1,748
0
0
www.facebook.com
#7
Thank you SnagIt, baggiolee, Irvine and ecurbw,

I did consider the Tamron 18-270 but it is a DX lens and I like the idea that it has Macro, but when I saw the barrel extended so long in 270mm I wipe it off from my list right away. 105mm is a good macro lens I already have and is using it to go out with the NPSS group for macro photo. I plan to go on to FF body that is why I try to buy FX lens if possible.

I can not define the seldom use is really how often, but I do have occassion like at Office function and Chingay I find it my 24-70mm not long enough. I do not think the lighting are ideal also. I do not see I will use more than 12 times a year. I thought of buying the 28-300mm for my April travel to Japan with my wife, but some in CS forum said this is a good lens and some said it is not a good lens. So I confuse because both are Nikon D90 users.

I do not have money to waste that is why I try to keep away from 70-200mm which is the most expensive zoom lens I have listed. If most opinion says I should take the pain and buy with no regret then I most likely will go for it.

Therefore you honest opinions will influence my final decision. A Funan higher level reputed shop recommended me 80-200 or 70-300 but I do not like the Sigma 150-500 recommended by them. I walked out empty handed.

then i suggest u buy the nikkor 70-300 vr 1st, u can still keep this lens even u upgrade to 2.8 later in the future. since it's quite light weight to be carried around unlike the 2.8.
 

yyD70S

Senior Member
Dec 25, 2005
2,454
0
0
Singapore
#8
Speaking from just this lens perspective and comparing only to the other two generations of Nikkor AF 70-300mm: In good light, the Nikkor AFS 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 VR focusing speed is more than adequate. And contrary to most reviews, I find its sharpness and contrast to be very good, especially up to 270mm. At around $700-$750 brand new, it is of very good value. It's not light but then again it's 'only' three-quarter your AFS24-70mm f2.8's weight.

Note: in good light ... being basically an f5.6 lens from 200mm+, it tends to hunt in less than ideal lighting... so be well informed. It can get frustrating at times.

However, if sports is very much your cup of tea, a f2.8 may make more sense. A fast aperture lens has not only speed advantage but also the advantage of selective forcusing. E.g. in last year's F1, I even find it hard to "shoot through the fence using the AFS300mm f4".
 

Last edited:

johndoe161

New Member
Apr 16, 2010
211
0
0
Ang Mo Kio
#9
Hey TS,

Maybe you can consider the 55-300 or the cheaper 55-200. I got my 70-300 and D7k together as I intend to shoot more nature and maybe some sports. I still have my 55-200, fortunately, when my 70-300 AF when bonkers and spent like 5 weeks at NSC (was the middle of CNY, read somewhere here they got backlogged). It AF quite fast on the D7k, has VR, IF and lightweight. I think you can find some in the BnS for less than $300. Hope that helps. Cheers!
 

Apr 7, 2010
2,560
0
0
Southern Enclave
#10
Having used the 70-200 VR II in various conditions - sports, low-light, indoor, portrait, etc... I find it a VERY versatile lens. If you only wanna keep just one all-in-one zoom and don't mind the WEIGHT... THIS is the lens to keep. Yes, 70-300 may be a lot lighter, but it is mostly a lens only to be used in bright lights. But don't forget to include sudden overcast of clouds which will give you a lot of headaches, even in broad daylight. Plus, when you're ready to move onto Full Frame bodies one day, this lens will continue to stay with you. Unlike the earlier version (VR1). With the VRII, fast action photography becomes a breeze.
 

Oct 26, 2009
459
2
18
Red Dot Island
#11
Speaking from just this lens perspective and comparing only to the other two generations of Nikkor AF 70-300mm: In good light, the Nikkor AFS 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 VR focusing speed is more than adequate. And contrary to most reviews, I find its sharpness and contrast to be very good, especially up to 270mm. At around $700-$750 brand new, it is of very good value. It's not light but then again it's 'only' three-quarter your AFS24-70mm f2.8's weight.

However, if sports is very much your cup of tea, a f2.8 may make more sense. A fast aperture lens has not only speed advantage but also the advantage of selective forcusing. E.g. in last year's F1, I even find it hard to "shoot through the fence using the AFS300mm f4".
Hey TS,

Maybe you can consider the 55-300 or the cheaper 55-200. I got my 70-300 and D7k together as I intend to shoot more nature and maybe some sports. I still have my 55-200, fortunately, when my 70-300 AF when bonkers and spent like 5 weeks at NSC (was the middle of CNY, read somewhere here they got backlogged). It AF quite fast on the D7k, has VR, IF and lightweight. I think you can find some in the BnS for less than $300. Hope that helps. Cheers!
Thank you for the warning Johndoe, but 55-300 / 200 are these for DX camera which I try to aviod as I mentioned eventually I will move on to FF body when the new D700 replacement released. Therefore, I do not wish to spend twice on the same FL lens. Further more I understand that between the same Focal Length FX lens produces better quality.

Therefore, at this moment 2 counts on 70-300 give me better encouragement but with your input, well a a a a ........

I actually quite like the 80-200mm but without VR I am concerned. I hv this 24-70 without VR I need to set speed at more than 1/100 if not blur is assured. My age can not hold this weight firmly and yet using monopod seem over doing it for this less than 1kg lens. Yes, weight is a big issue to me but I like to have a quality lens also. This is conflicting inside me. However, if it is over 1kg of any lens using the monopod, I think I feel justified if I do get encourage to go for it.
 

johndoe161

New Member
Apr 16, 2010
211
0
0
Ang Mo Kio
#12
Thank you for the warning Johndoe, but 55-300 / 200 are these for DX camera which I try to aviod as I mentioned eventually I will move on to FF body when the new D700 replacement released. Therefore, I do not wish to spend twice on the same FL lens. Further more I understand that between the same Focal Length FX lens produces better quality.

Therefore, at this moment 2 counts on 70-300 give me better encouragement but with your input, well a a a a ........
Hey TS,

I hope I didnt scare you with my '70-300 AF going bonkers' story. Mine is probably a bad copy, it is still under warranty so no issues there when I sent it to NSC. I think they replaced the entire AF system (maybe the AF-S too). I didnt really ask coz I was in a hurry to go back my office, so I just did a basic test when I picked up my lens with the D7k. Im going nature-walking this weekend to field-test it, hope its all fixed. Anyway, you can add me to voting the 70-300 for you tele needs. Since you intend to move up to FX, the 55-200/300 is not a good idea. Sorry for that, D7k is a DX body, thought you be ok with DX lens. Cheers!
 

Nubzz

New Member
Dec 31, 2010
192
0
0
32
Singapore
#13
Hi TS,

Understand u have gotten alot of feedback from fellow CS-ers. But looking through ur post u dont forsee u will use it over 12times a year..

My suggestion is, y not go and rent the lens? (You can even take the chance to rent different telephoto lenses for different events to get a feel of all those many lenses)

I believe for all the events that you require the telephoto (office function, chinggay, maybe National Day, Festivals?), you would have ample time to call up the rental store to reserve the lens for usage on those days.

It'll be a more cost-effective solution pending ur upgrade to FF camera. Perhaps by then u will really know should u invest the money to get whichever telephoto lenses that entices you.
 

Irvine

Senior Member
Jan 1, 2010
1,037
0
36
North? South? East? West?
#14
Thank you for the warning Johndoe, but 55-300 / 200 are these for DX camera which I try to aviod as I mentioned eventually I will move on to FF body when the new D700 replacement released. Therefore, I do not wish to spend twice on the same FL lens. Further more I understand that between the same Focal Length FX lens produces better quality.

Therefore, at this moment 2 counts on 70-300 give me better encouragement but with your input, well a a a a ........

I actually quite like the 80-200mm but without VR I am concerned. I hv this 24-70 without VR I need to set speed at more than 1/100 if not blur is assured. My age can not hold this weight firmly and yet using monopod seem over doing it for this less than 1kg lens. Yes, weight is a big issue to me but I like to have a quality lens also. This is conflicting inside me. However, if it is over 1kg of any lens using the monopod, I think I feel justified if I do get encourage to go for it.
80-200 well meets ur expectations, weighin at 1.3kg. however, u haf to know that it's screw-driven AF system, n it's slower compared to AF-S lenses.

u can read up more here:
http://bythom.com/nikkor-80-200-lens.htm
 

Apr 7, 2010
2,560
0
0
Southern Enclave
#15
My suggestion is to drop by NSC and to give all the lenses a go (to have a better feel of all their weights). Which ever feels good in your hands, go rent that one and see...

One thing though, if you really have to use a monopod to handle a 1kg plus lens... then no point going for VRII... (made the optical stabilisation pretty useless anyway - you have to switch it off).
 

HeMan

New Member
Sep 8, 2009
39
0
0
#16
Nubzz and kriegsketten ideas about renting is a good idea before you commit to a lens. My advise is to go for the best lens you could affort to, then you will stop looking at other lens and focus on taking photo. That's why you choose 24-70?
 

Reno

Senior Member
Jan 22, 2005
2,324
1
38
Land of the Teddy Bear
#17
suggest you do not buy anything first, think what you want then you get the best of the lens for it.
 

sf_kang

New Member
Nov 3, 2004
642
0
0
65
Singapore
#18
suggest you do not buy anything first, think what you want then you get the best of the lens for it.
Hi TS, I strongly agree with the suggestion from our senior member Reno. Don't be compelled to buy just because you feel you have to complete the 'focal length range'. You are investing in a camera system (bodies, lenses, flash, etc) that should be customised according to what you wish the system to do for you, i.e.
start by asking what kind of shooting you mostly do, e.g. travel, landscape, portraits, lowlight work, etc., etc.
Also as yourself how likely you'd be going over to FX sensor (I am going to debate here the pros and cons of DX vs FX) - just you choice.
When these are thought through careful, then spend your hard earned money on the best lenses that fit what you do MOST of the time. For those ONCE-IN-A-WHILE needs, it is always possible to go and rent a lens.
Hope this helps.
Fred
 

andysim65

New Member
Apr 8, 2010
741
4
0
53
#19
how about nikon af 180 f2.8 prime len light weight and inexpensive
 

Oct 26, 2009
459
2
18
Red Dot Island
#20
Dear Bros, I fully agreed think it over and over what I need before part with the money. That is why I seek valuable advises. All your advises are good. Try out at the NSC is something I never thought of. Can I just go in and ask to try out?

If I decided on a lens and when I need it and go for rental I think it is a good option, but renting it to try out then I find the rental cost I might as well put in the investment and buy the 70-200 VR directly.

Luckily I limit myself to select within Nikon lenses only. That already tossing me around between 70-300, 80-200 w or w/o VR and the 70-200 VR. Cost vs features and usefulness in the long run.

Please confuse me more if there are good new nikon telephoto zoom lenses coming into market soon. I do not consider telephoto fix range lens, just feel it is very restricted. Just like the 105 I have just used it for macro only. I rather to use 24-70 for normal mid range shooting or portrait even for landscape.

At this moment I more favour to get the 28-300mm. Feature wise, it has VR, G, ED good range, weight is very close to my 24-70 that I can bearly live with. Just that the photo finishing quality will be be disappointing if I bring this to Japan to shoot the Sakura? Or shall I just forget it till I get the FF body and live with the 24-70 for the time being.

1.3 or 1.5Kg lens is really heavy to use and carry for me but I like the quality of the photo finishing.

haiiiii
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom