Nikon 80-200 2.8D or Tamron 70-200 2.8

[vipgraphx]

I want to purchase one of these lenses. What say you?

I heard that Nikon 80-200 takes very sharp pictures and can do the job just as good as the newer 70-200 but slower on the focusing but but only .3seconds or so.

The Tamron I personally tried at a shop and it seems to be pretty good.

Since I am on a d7000 the crop factor on these lenses would take me up to about 300mm and I am looking to use to shoot my kids soccer games and also use for landscapes and portraits.

There is way to much info out there and opinions so i was hoping to find someone here who actually has used both of these lenses or at least one to comment on what to buy.

Nikon- Pros
better build
better glass
sharp pictures
cost for used lens I found $825 with case and hood and caps

Nikon Cons
Older lens
No VR- but from what I hear must professionals don't use it any way and slows down your shutter speeds especially in burst mode for sports.
NO internal focus motor - so slower in focus but is it faster than the tamron?
heavy has heck

Tamron Pros
can buy new for cheaper than the used nikon 80-200
warranty
sharper than the sigma (assumptions on the internet)

Tamron Cons
build quality
slower focusing (but is it faster than the 80-200)
also older lens (no updates for a long time from what I have read)


Please if any of you can help that would be so cool!

 

[Dillard]

I haven't tried the Tamron, but would personally go for the Nikon. It is a solid lens, that I found to be spot one every time! I've heard talk of both the sigma and the tamron being soft at 2.8, which is one of the main reasons to get the lens (to utilize the 2.8 aperture).

to address your concerns...

The lens is solid and heavy, but reliable. Its is not overly heavy, and has a collar incase you want to mount. It's autofocus was great on my D90, and even better on the D7000. I took some indoor basketball pictures at f/2.8 and was amazingly sharp. Definitely a great lens!

 

[Nikon_Josh]

I want to purchase one of these lenses. What say you?

I heard that Nikon 80-200 takes very sharp pictures and can do the job just as good as the newer 70-200 but slower on the focusing but but only .3seconds or so.

The Tamron I personally tried at a shop and it seems to be pretty good.

Since I am on a d7000 the crop factor on these lenses would take me up to about 300mm and I am looking to use to shoot my kids soccer games and also use for landscapes and portraits.

There is way to much info out there and opinions so i was hoping to find someone here who actually has used both of these lenses or at least one to comment on what to buy.

Nikon- Pros
better build
better glass
sharp pictures
cost for used lens I found $825 with case and hood and caps

Nikon Cons
Older lens
No VR- but from what I hear must professionals don't use it any way and slows down your shutter speeds especially in burst mode for sports.
NO internal focus motor - so slower in focus but is it faster than the tamron?
heavy has heck

Tamron Pros
can buy new for cheaper than the used nikon 80-200
warranty
sharper than the sigma (assumptions on the internet)

Tamron Cons
build quality
slower focusing (but is it faster than the 80-200)
also older lens (no updates for a long time from what I have read)


Please if any of you can help that would be so cool!

Hmmmm I think the Nikon may be a better all rounder, but I have to say the Tamron produces delicious results. Beautiful colour and bokeh! I would seriously consider the lens for the price it costs, the Tammy also has close focus.

 

[djacobox372]

$825 is very high for a 80-200mm af-d... that's about what I would expect to pay for the 80-200mm af-s version of this lens which focuses very fast. Ebay auctions are your best bet for good deals, there's a few "BIN" AF-S versions right now for around $1100, but the auctions typically go for less.

Also, if focus speed isn't a issue for you, consider the older single ring version of this lens, same great optics and build quality but can be had for $400-500 in mint condition.

 

[APHPHOTO]

If money is not an option. Than always go for first party lenses.

 

[pdq5oh]

I've had the Nikon push/pull 80-200 on my old F4. It has to turn the front elements to focus. Way too slow for anything moving. I had a Tamron 70-200. Focus wasn't really fast enough on that for football, IMO. This was with a D7000. IQ was very good when proper focus was achieved. I now have a Nikon 70-200 VRI and there's no comparison. An 80-200 AF S is close enough to the same money as a used VRI so I saw no point in buying that lens. The AFS D two ring lens will focus about the same as the Tamron in terms of speed. IQ is better, IMO.