Advice needed: Choosing a zoom lens to shoot bands from an arena's pit

Griffey · Apr 9, 2013

I just purchased my first DSLR body (a Nikon D7000) and am interested in buying a f/2.8 zoom lens.
Looking for a zoom I can use solely for low-light concert photography from the pit at a large arena.

I opted to not buy the D7000 package with the 18-105mm VR kit lens, as I figure there are better alternative lenses out there for this.

Budget is $400 max. Looking to buy used on eBay. Any brand.
For those who have shot with a crop sensor DSLR, which used f/2.8 zooms would you recommend?

I've read blog articles about concert photography, where writers suggest mid-range zooms, long range zooms, "a bunch of cheap, fast primes" and am trying to determine what I actually need.

Any advice would be appreciated!

jrizal · Apr 9, 2013

The Nikon 55-300mm is a pretty decent lens for the price. Brand new it is $400 and a refurb is $250 at Cameta.

Search Results

But the sweet spot is the 70-300mm VR. It is close to $600 brand new which is above your budget. But the refurb is $360.

Search Results

There are cheaper options such as the Nikon 70-300mm AF G non-VR, and the Sigma and Tamron equialents all selling for less than $200. Image quality is mediocre as these are entry-level lenses.

And if since you have the budget, you may want to choose the 70-300mm VR. It is considered a semi-pro lens as it is still a cinsumer grade lens but image quality is still highly regarded by pros given its price range.

Do note that these are f4/4.5-5.6 lenses. The Nikon f2.8 70-200mm is $2400 and the f4 version is $1400.

PS IMO primes won't be practical for concerrts, unless you're on or near the stage. Telephoto zooms even your kit lens can provide more versatilty. But that's me.

dewey · Apr 9, 2013

A Nikon 2.8 at $400 is going to be rough if you find one... I'm going out on a limb saying you won't find one at that price without serious defects. You can usually find the trusty 80-200 2.8 for $500-$600 on CL or eBay.

You can always rent one until you make enough to buy one.

Griffey · Apr 9, 2013

How about third-party brands like Sigmas, Tamrons and Tokina?
What do they offer as an alternative to the Nikon

80-200 2.8?

Mach0 · Apr 9, 2013

35-70 2.8, tamron 28-75, and tamron 17-50. A push and pull 80-200. All of those are in that range.

Mach0 · Apr 9, 2013

Griffey said:
How about third-party brands like Sigmas, Tamrons and Tokina?
What do they offer as an alternative to the Nikon 80-200 2.8?

Tamron has a 70-200 but you need a few more hundred bucks.

Griffey · Apr 9, 2013

Would either of these be ideal for shooting from the pit?
Sigma 24-70mm DG f/2.8
Macro Tamron 28-75mm XR Di IF f/2.8

What would I need shooting from the soundboard?

CaptainNapalm · Apr 9, 2013

FYI the 70-300 VR will give you the right reach however it will not give you the low light performance you're looking for in those low light situations. I would recommend this lens in general, but not for concerts.

Derrel · Apr 9, 2013

Griffey said:
How about third-party brands like Sigmas, Tamrons and Tokina?
What do they offer as an alternative to the Nikon
80-200 2.8?

They "typically" offer an optical performance that, at f/2.8, will make you shudder. Meaning at f/2.8 the image is somewhat sharp at the center, dismal at the corners, and with slight, veiling glare across the entire image at f/2.8. Then, once stopped down to f/4, they get much better. Whereas most Nikkor 70-200 or 80-200 f/2.8 lenses are "so-so" to "good" at f/2.8, the third party lenses range from "abysmal" to "sub-par" at f/2.8. Due to the fact that a Zoom~NIKKOR has typically been priced $800 to $1,200 higher than a Siggy, Tamron, or Tokina, and is built well enough to offer a five-year USA warranty, Nikon sees fit to make their high-grade lenses USEFUL at f/2.8, whereas the other, 3rd-party lenses have been mostly catering to users who just do not have the money to pay for the real, genuine "good stuff".

Mike_E · Apr 10, 2013

Here you go.. Tokina 28 70mm F 2 8 at x 287 AF Pro SV If Lens for Nikon 6909 | eBay .

It's built like a tank and is heavy. At f2.8 it's a little softer than it is stopped down one but I actually like this for portraits.

You might be better off though with a 50mm, 85mm f1.8 and a 24/28mm f2.8 and a extra large fanny pack for quick access when you want to change them. You may look a little geeky but would you rather look good or get the shot?

KmH · Apr 10, 2013

Griffey said:
How about third-party brands like Sigmas, Tamrons and Tokina?
What do they offer as an alternative to the Nikon
80-200 2.8?

What Derrel said, plus quicker declining resale value.

By the way Nikon has made 3 optically good versions of the AF 80-200 mm f/2.8. The 2 older push-pull to zoom versions are worth checking out.

Griffey · Apr 10, 2013

KmH said:
Griffey said:

How about third-party brands like Sigmas, Tamrons and Tokina?
What do they offer as an alternative to the Nikon
80-200 2.8?

Click to expand...

What Derrel said, plus quicker declining resale value.

By the way Nikon has made 3 optically good versions of the AF 80-200 mm f/2.8. The 2 older push-pull to zoom versions are worth checking out.

I'll look at saving up and getting a used Nikon AF 80-200mm f/2.8 push-pull, in that case.

I'm sure this topic has been covered, but when buying a lens like this on eBay... what questions would I want to ask the seller to determine I'm not getting a junky one. Dust is common with the push-pulls, no? How can this be fixed or is this only a minor issue?

Can finding out a serial number and dating the lens help me choose the best version? Or is quality control generally the same?

How can you size up a lens on eBay other than if it looks clean in the photos, the description lists it's been babied, etc.?

Thanks for all of the advice, everyone.

manicmike · Apr 10, 2013

Griffey said:
KmH said:

Griffey said:

How about third-party brands like Sigmas, Tamrons and Tokina?
What do they offer as an alternative to the Nikon
80-200 2.8?

Click to expand...

What Derrel said, plus quicker declining resale value.

By the way Nikon has made 3 optically good versions of the AF 80-200 mm f/2.8. The 2 older push-pull to zoom versions are worth checking out.

Click to expand...

I'll look at saving up and getting a used Nikon AF 80-200mm f/2.8 push-pull, in that case.

I'm sure this topic has been covered, but when buying a lens like this on eBay... what questions would I want to ask the seller to determine I'm not getting a junky one. Dust is common with the push-pulls, no? How can this be fixed or is this only a minor issue?

Can finding out a serial number and dating the lens help me choose the best version? Or is quality control generally the same?

How can you size up a lens on eBay other than if it looks clean in the photos, the description lists it's been babied, etc.?

Thanks for all of the advice, everyone.

I'd make sure it has no scratches on the glass, and is free of fungus. A scratched up body doesn't do anything to image quality. Make sure there's a lot in the description about the shape of the item. If you get it and it's not like it is in the description, you can return it. If the seller won't let you return it after you find it's not as described, file a claim with ebay.