50 or 70-200mm 2.8 zoom lenses

[Tbini87]

Hey guys, I have been trying to find info about lenses in this range. I was also thinking that there should be a way in this forum to have discussions on specific lenses OR specific lense ranges (50mm primes, 18-50 zooms etc). However, for this thread, I have been looking into the longer zoom lenses like

Amazon.com: Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG HSM II Macro Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo: Reviews, Prices & more

and

Amazon.com: Tamron AF 70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD IF Macro Lens with Built in Motor for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

I am looking at those lenses since they are much more affordable than Nikon lenses in the same category. I would be using these lenses for weddings mostly, and shooting on a D90 (I also have 2 kit lenses, 35mm prime and 50mm prime, and will probably be buying a 17-50mm 2.8 zoom soon). Are these lenses going to be important for weddings? Can any users give specific pros and cons or feedback on these lenses in general or compared to the nikon equivelants.

Also, does the fact that one says "macro" mean anything important? Would that have any affect on its use during weddings? Thanks guys.

 

[tirediron]

There's a reason those lenses are more affordable than their Nikon counterparts. I can't speak to either of them specifically, but I will say that I own the Nikon 70-200 2.8 and it is worth every penny I spent on it.

That is, IMO, an essenstial focal length for wedding photographers, and I have found it to be ideal for shooting from the back of the crowd.
The word 'macro' as it applies to these lenses simply means that the lenses will focus a little more closely; this will not have any detrimental effect on any other type of photography.

The only con to fast 70-200s is that they're big and heavy, and even with IS/VR/SR/?? whatever it's called after an hour or two of shooting, you'll be wishing for a monopod.

 

[MrLogic]

I used the Tamron for a while. Optically, it's a good lens. Bokeh is very nice for a zoom. Autofocus is very slow and it can hunt (in all but the brightest light). Construction is poor. Bottom of the barrel.

It had a 41.5% failure rate before LensRentals stopped carrying it in 2009.

• The Tamron 70-200 f2.8 is joining the Sigma 120-400 and 150-500 (45% failure rate) in the Lensrentals Hall of Shame: lenses we no longer carry because their failure rate is so high we just can’t afford them. Almost half of them have failed, usually after 3 to 6 months in service.

LensRentals.com - Lens Repair Data 3.5

 

[shaunly]

for the price of the sigma, you can get the nikon 80-200 AFD. That is super sharp at f2.8 and it'll focus faster than the Tamron and in par if not faster than the sigma too. You can find it used for a great price.

 

[Tbini87]

for the price of the sigma, you can get the nikon 80-200 AFD. That is super sharp at f2.8 and it'll focus faster than the Tamron and in par if not faster than the sigma too. You can find it used for a great price.

are you talking about this lens? it will still focus on any body with internal focus pins like the D90+ right? Is this an old lens or something which makes it less expensive than other nikon lenses i have been looking at?

Amazon.com: Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

 

[Tbini87]

There's a reason those lenses are more affordable than their Nikon counterparts. I can't speak to either of them specifically, but I will say that I own the Nikon 70-200 2.8 and it is worth every penny I spent on it.

That is, IMO, an essenstial focal length for wedding photographers, and I have found it to be ideal for shooting from the back of the crowd.
The word 'macro' as it applies to these lenses simply means that the lenses will focus a little more closely; this will not have any detrimental effect on any other type of photography.

The only con to fast 70-200s is that they're big and heavy, and even with IS/VR/SR/?? whatever it's called after an hour or two of shooting, you'll be wishing for a monopod.

haha, when i have been looking at these lenses they look MASSIVE and not too friendly to carry around. I really understand that Nikon makes the best quality lenses, but this college budget of mine forces me to constantly look for a better bang for the buck. If i could get 80% of the performance for 50% of the prince I would go for it.

 

[Derrel]

haha, when i have been looking at these lenses they look MASSIVE and not too friendly to carry around. I really understand that Nikon makes the best quality lenses, but this college budget of mine forces me to constantly look for a better bang for the buck. If i could get 80% of the performance for 50% of the prince I would go for it.

These lenses are quite large, yes. 80% of the performance at roughly 50% of the cost is what Sigma USED TO offer its buyers with their new 70-200 models, five years ago. SInce that time, SIgma has been raising its prices, and now the cost of a brand-new, current Sigma 70-200 2.8 model is MORE than half of the cost of a brand new Nikkor version II VR model. However, Sigma has been making 70-200 2.8 models for quite some time now, and there are some earlier versions still available new if you scout around. If you need "a deal" look at retailers like Sigma4Less, or Tri-State Photo in New York.

Alternately, look at the 80-200 Nikon AF-D model, used as another option. It is not a 70-200, but it is affordable, and very plentiful used.

 

[dcmoody23]

I have the sigma you're looking at, but it's the canon mount. I actually love it, though I rarely use it outside of shooting sports.. Having said that - I haven't used the canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS, but I'm well satisfied for now. It's very well made, but kind of heavy (i don't really care about that).. I don't know, my opinion can't very well be taken into thought because of I haven't used the more expensive lens, but I can say that I don't think you'd be disappointed going with the sigma for now.

 

[shaunly]

for the price of the sigma, you can get the nikon 80-200 AFD. That is super sharp at f2.8 and it'll focus faster than the Tamron and in par if not faster than the sigma too. You can find it used for a great price.

are you talking about this lens? it will still focus on any body with internal focus pins like the D90+ right? Is this an old lens or something which makes it less expensive than other nikon lenses i have been looking at?

Amazon.com: Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

Yes, it will AF on your D90. This lens has been around for over 20years and it's still in production today. Don't let the age fool you though, it's a GREAT lens and still VERY popular till this day.

 

[shaunly]

Here's an example of the 80-200, @ 120mm f/2.8

 

[Tbini87]

for the price of the sigma, you can get the nikon 80-200 AFD. That is super sharp at f2.8 and it'll focus faster than the Tamron and in par if not faster than the sigma too. You can find it used for a great price.

are you talking about this lens? it will still focus on any body with internal focus pins like the D90+ right? Is this an old lens or something which makes it less expensive than other nikon lenses i have been looking at?

Amazon.com: Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

Yes, it will AF on your D90. This lens has been around for over 20years and it's still in production today. Don't let the age fool you though, it's a GREAT lens and still VERY popular till this day.

thanks for the info and pic for reference. i am actually a little afraid that the lense may be too heavy for my wife... and for the D90 which doesn't seem as rugged as a D200 or D300+. We have a tripod and monopod, but don't know how practical those would be with this lens when shooting a wedding, especially since i would want portrait shots as well (vertical and horizontal shots). I will definitely throw this on the list of possibilities. Thanks.