Nikon or Tamron

Ted Evans

TPF Noob!
Joined
Nov 29, 2014
Messages
177
Reaction score
22
Location
Crossville, TN
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
I know this is very subjective but would you vote for a used Nikon f/2.8 70-200 VR in the $1500 price range or the new Tamron f/2.8 70-200 for about the same price? Is there a huge difference in the Nikon VR and the VRII? I cannot spend $2400 for a new VRII which is what I would like to have. Thanks for your comments.
 
The VR Mk I has pretty bad vignetting, if you use it on a DX body then you will be fine, if you use it on FX or planing to move FX then dont bother getting the VR Mk I
I had the chance to get a used VR Mk I for 1400$ or Tami 70-200mm VC for 1600$.
I went for the Tami and I am not sorry, I am now using an FX camera.
 
The vignette on an FX body is not very noticeable. The glass is amazing and sorry, nothing I've seen comes close optically. Haven't checked the Tamron but I know the VR1 is a really nice piece of glass. You can find one in the USA for under $1200
 
I didn't realize that Tamron had one. I've had mixed experiences. Years ago I had a Tamron zoom that was pure crap. Then I had another prime that was awesome. I presume they're like Sigma. If you get the lower-end line you can't expect much but the HSM lenses are really good (in my experience). I'm actually in withdrawals right now. I literally just got home from UPS. I'm shipping my Sigma back for a firmware update. If you haven't considered Sigma, I have nothing but great things to say about my 70-200. It's got thousands of images on it. The finish is flaking off but it's at least 9 years old (no VR) and I'm in no hurry to replace it.
 
I would go for the used Nikon every time. You can turn around and sell it in a year or 2 for what you paid for it, if not more. You can't do that with a new Tamron.
 
Quality aside, and Nikon has that, an excellent point made above. I bought mine used and sold it later (for a vrII) at a small profit.
 
My vote is Tamron. I have one and it is fantastic. You also get a 6 year warranty. If anything goes wrong with your used Nikon it will cost you lots of money. If you buy a used Nikon, try to check it first, Since it is a "Pro" lens, many out there have lots of use...
 
Optically probably going to be close, all very good points above. As with most lens choices, a tough call. Personally, I might try for a vrII model if you can find a good deal on a used one. Do you need really fast AF? If not, the 80-200 is optically superb.

On a side note, a suggestion to the mods, the separate lens and accessories sections are unnecessary.
 
Optically probably going to be close, all very good points above. As with most lens choices, a tough call. Personally, I might try for a vrII model if you can find a good deal on a used one. Do you need really fast AF? If not, the 80-200 is optically superb.

The VRII was my first choice until, I read some reviews and comments about the focal length at minimum focusing distance. That, in addition to the cost, has dampened my desire for the lens. Kris made a good point about the 6 year warranty of the new Tamron vs a used VRI. I just ordered the Tamron 150-600 and if I am satisfied with it, I am leaning toward their 70-200 also. Thanks for you comments and suggestions.

BTW, how far south in MS? I was raised about 20 miles north of the coast.
 
Last edited:
My vote is Tamron. I have one and it is fantastic. You also get a 6 year warranty. If anything goes wrong with your used Nikon it will cost you lots of money. If you buy a used Nikon, try to check it first, Since it is a "Pro" lens, many out there have lots of use...

Makes good sense to me Kris. If I am satisfied with the Tamron 150-600 that I just ordered, then I will probably opt for their 70-200 also.
 
Thanks to all for your comments/suggestions, they are much appreciated.
 
Optically probably going to be close, all very good points above. As with most lens choices, a tough call. Personally, I might try for a vrII model if you can find a good deal on a used one. Do you need really fast AF? If not, the 80-200 is optically superb.

The VRII was my first choice until, I read some reviews and comments about the focal length at minimum focusing distance. That, in addition to the cost, has dampened my desire for the lens. Kris made a good point about the 6 year warranty of the new Tamron vs a used VRI. I just ordered the Tamron 150-600 and if I am satisfied with it, I am leaning toward their 70-200 also. Thanks for you comments and suggestions.

BTW, how far south in MS? I was raised about 20 miles north of the coast.

Yeah, I forgot about the min focus distance. I have the Tamron 150-600 and love it. Born and raised in Biloxi, now live about 20 miles north of as well, north of Pass Christian.
 
Nikon hands down !!!!!!!
 
I would go for the used Nikon every time. You can turn around and sell it in a year or 2 for what you paid for it, if not more. You can't do that with a new Tamron.
You got that right, Nikon every time for me also. You would be lucky to get half of what you pay for a 3 rd party lens in a year or 2.
 
Is there a huge difference in the Nikon VR and the VRII?
Yes, most definitely. Thats why Nikon offered the VR2 so quickly.

I cannot spend $2400 for a new VRII which is what I would like to have. Thanks for your comments.
You could go for the 70-200mm f4 VR, which gives you the same or better image quality, at half the price AND weight.
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top