Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    I spend too much of my life on TPF!
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    338
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    7 times

    Nikon VS NIKON VS TAMRON

    I need a Real lense. Options

    nikon 80-200 2.8

    Nikon 70-200 2.8

    Tamron 70-200 2.8

    obviously i would choose the nikon 70-200 2.8VR but its more than double the price


    I was wondering what peoples thoughts and if you have any sample photos with these lenses.

    Mostly what i would be using it for will be automotive photography (track, dragstrip, other)

    is the VR really worth paying double?

    show me some pics if you can and what camera your using also....thanks



  2. #2
    ann
    ann is offline
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    4,261
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    188 times
    why not go to a local camera store, and take your camera, or at least your own compact fash card and test these lens.
    take the same image at each major focal length and at each full stop. then go home and look at them on your monitor, you will have your answer.

    For myself, i find the VR function at nice feature, especially with the type of work you will be doing. (I do own the 70-200 2.8 vr nikor lens and i have the 80-200 2.8 as well.) It is my personal decision not to own a third party lens. I am sure you will find many others who disagree with me, which is fine. That is why i suggest you test for yourself, then make a choice based on what you see first hand.

  3. #3
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    9,712
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    204 times
    VR has benefits for panning shots since it would give you vertical VR but ignore horrizontal movement, but really I don't think it's anywhere near worth double the price, and with minimal effort you can get great panning shots without it.

    Other than that the Nikkor 70-200 brings nothing more to the table. The 80-200 can easily track a fast car coming towards you, providing it's on a capable camera. The focus speed depends exclusively on the camera body it's attached to and the lens is very well geared.
    "I am always satisfied with the best." -Oscar Wilde
    Larger versions always on flickr
    Best photos in my gallery

    Proud Supporter of The Pact

  4. #4
    No longer a newbie, moving up!
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Pinacolodaburg
    Posts
    67
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    0 times
    First time posting images here - lets hope it works. Took these with a D60 and the Tamron 70-200. I also have the 2x converter for it which doubles the effective range, only the last image used the 2x converter. no PP on any of these photos
    1.


    2.


    3.


    4. This one I did use the 2x converter for - kinda happy with it.

  5. #5
    No longer a newbie, moving up!
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Pinacolodaburg
    Posts
    67
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    0 times
    cool man posting photos worked. yea, the tamron 70-200 is a great lens. it focuses a little loud (but who really cares) and the manual focus ring has a tendency not to engage. usually requires a second try a little harder.

  6. #6
    I spend too much of my life on TPF!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    784
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    3 times
    I would vote for the 80-200 2.8....good piece of glass.

  7. #7
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Eddington, ME
    Posts
    2,101
    My Gallery
    (0)
    Liked
    15 times
    The nikon 80-200 f/2.8D is a rock solid lens. If you look for used make sure its a twist zoom and not older push pull. The twist zoom is faster focusing than the older push pull.

    The 80-200D is really close in price to the third party lens makers. It's a great buy. As for the VR and being worth it. Just look at some of the older copies of car / bike racing mags and books. They got those pictures without VR. Just takes practice. I am big on buying good glass but I still only have 1 VR lens and that was a kit lens that came with the D40X I bought for travel. All my other Nikon lenses are F/2.8D's including an 80-200 that is about 8 years old and going strong, no issues with it ever!
    If you want to know my equipment, your gonna have to specify which bag of equipment you want to know. Choices are bag #1 thru #6

  8. #8
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    2,158
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    214 times
    I would avoid the Tamron for automotive sports. Everything i've read about it says that it's super sharp, but the focus speed is slow, although I haven't tried it personally. That was a dealbreaker for me for shooting fast moving cars. I couldn't afford the Nikons, (80-200 is cheap but without the AF-S) so I bought the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 HSM and use it for motorsports. Works great. Focus is fast and it's sharp. Sure it's not as sharp as the nikons but it's literally half the price of the 70-200 for example, and I am extremely happy with it.

    some shots with it
    Flickr: Search bhop's photostream
    Last edited by bhop; 04-30-2009 at 12:34 PM.

  9. #9
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,926
    My Gallery
    (15)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    129 times
    Like everybody has said, tamron zooms take excellent photos, but their focus is loud and slow.

    BUT, if you don't care about focus speed then you may consider saving even more $$ and buying an older, used tamron 70-210mm f2.8; those sell used for about $350 and are fantastic lenses EXCEPT for focus speed.

  10. #10
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    2,179
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    3 times
    Slows probably relative. To me, the 80-200 AF-D is "slow".

  11. #11
    I spend too much of my life on TPF!
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    338
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    7 times
    i just wish i could get my hands on a 80-200 to compare...noone around here has one....I have seen one in the past year and it sold in 2hours...lol

  12. #12
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    2,158
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    214 times
    Quote Originally Posted by Lunchbox View Post
    i just wish i could get my hands on a 80-200 to compare...noone around here has one....I have seen one in the past year and it sold in 2hours...lol
    Well, the AF-S version should be comparable to other AF-S lenses, which would be good, if not great, but the AF-D.. that'd depend on the AF torque of the camera you're using it on. For example, my Sigma 70-300 lens (no internal motor) is annoyingly slow on my D70, slightly better on my D200, but useably fast on my F100.

  13. #13
    I spend too much of my life on TPF!
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    338
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    7 times
    i am shooting a d200

  14. #14
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    9,712
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    204 times
    The Nikkor 80-200 is sufficiently fast on a D200. I say sufficiently because a lot of people complain that it's "slow" and lets face it, it has no silentwave motor in it. That said it had no issue tracking a Yamaha R1 coming down towards me on a straight. It also had no issue tracking a football game. So the question is what does define too slow?
    "I am always satisfied with the best." -Oscar Wilde
    Larger versions always on flickr
    Best photos in my gallery

    Proud Supporter of The Pact

  15. #15
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Eddington, ME
    Posts
    2,101
    My Gallery
    (0)
    Liked
    15 times
    Well I think there is some confusion in which 80-200 people are refferring to sometimes. As the older push pull version was offered as an 80-200 af-D model. Then in late 90's Nikon changed the design to twist zoom lens with a faster acting focusing system (gearing). This was also listed as a 80-200 af-D. So even though they are 2 different lenses they had the same identification. The later lens, still in production was a bit faster than the original version.
    If you want to know my equipment, your gonna have to specify which bag of equipment you want to know. Choices are bag #1 thru #6

 

 

Ads

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Nikon D90 and Tamron 18-270
    By basser in forum Beyond the Basics
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 04-18-2010, 02:04 PM
  2. FS: Mint Nikon D80, Tamron 17-50, Nikon 18-105
    By ironmicd in forum Buy and Sell
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-31-2009, 03:27 AM
  3. Tamron 17-50 f2.8 vs Nikon 50 f1.4
    By mikie2084 in forum Photography Equipment & Products
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-09-2009, 03:23 PM
  4. WTB: Tamron 17-50 f2.8 for Nikon
    By NateS in forum Buy and Sell
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-14-2009, 08:32 AM
  5. Nikon 18-70 vs. tamron 17-50
    By photogincollege in forum Photography Equipment & Products
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-08-2008, 11:23 PM

Search tags for this page

af nikon 80-200d photo sample
,

nikon 2161 vs 2197

,
nikon 2197 vs tamron
,
nikon 80-200 nikon vs tamron 70-200
,
nikon 80-200 vs tamron 80-200
,
nikon d7000 with nikon 2161
,
tamron 70-200 2.8 vs nikon
,
tamron 70-200 vs nikkor sample images
,
tamron 70-200 vs nikon 70-200
,
tamron vs nikon lense?
Click on a term to search for related topics.