tamron 70-200mm v. tamron 70-300mm

[TheFantasticG]

"Give a man a fish,and he'll eat for a day.Teach a man to fish,and you'll be able to sell him bait." ...i think the OP's last post said it clearly.Perhaps it should've been moved to "Beginners" What I'm saying is the OP's question was lost quickly in a lot of posturing.

Fair enough.

 

[hamlet]

Hamlet. Stop posting. Really. Stop. You didn't say that in your first post. You said raise ISO to freeze action. That is grossly misleading. You didn't say raise ISO to allow a higher shutter speed while maintaining a wide aperture. Had you said that we all would have known that to be true. What you said was false which is why Braineack said what he did and I said what I did. Now that you went and read up on what we said you have changed you're latest comments to reflect something that could be truthful.

If you understand the basics then it is clear what i meant, since it was directly addressed to you and nobody else. Nothing i've said is false information because if you simply explained yourself instead of childishly kicking the back seat, i could have instructed you or maybe you could have corrected me on something i may have articulated incorrectly. Talking to me in third person and telling me to shut up is not how adults conduct themselves.

 

[hamlet]

I shouldn't bother but... Hamlet: You could easily avoid any of these arguments by simply stating your hazy theories as exactly that... theories. Before presenting your thought start by saying "in my opinion..." or "unless I'm mistaken..." or something similar, rather than stating false or misleading information as imperial fact (which will in all likelihood will just confuse the OP). Then you won't have to continually back-pedal and try to substantiate all of your ambiguous or false statements. Might save us all some time in the long run. Cheers!

Granted that what i said could confuse the OP. But please don't join into conversations you don't understand.

 

[Braineack]

The D5100 probably won't even be close in accuracy at 300mm with an f5.6 lens even in good light compared to my camera

I took these with the Nikon 70-300 with my D5100 at 300mm, but granted it was a nice sunny day at noon: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...342658-some-nfl-action-redskins-win-once.html

For these I set the shutter speed where I wanted, kept the aperture stopped as low as possible, and let auto-iso do it's thing with matrix metering. Even at 1/1600 I was just barely freezing all of the action and that brought the iso up to 320 on a bright-ass sunny day. If you were shooting on a cloudy day, or in the evening, I'd expect the iso to skyrocket as the light was lessened. And that will quickly degrade the IQ on a D5100, at around 1000iso the image gets pretty noisy, anything about that and the quality suffer significantly to where it starts looking like a picture taken on a cell phone.

This is why even though I have a 70-300, I still plan to get a 70-200 2.8 so I have fast glass to be able to maintain a higher shutter speed AND a lower iso. If you still needed the reach, you could add a 1.5TC and only lose 1 stop of light, and still be at f/4 at 300mm. When you start shooting with a long zoom in non-ideal lighting conditions you'll see why this is a prefered combo when you end up with grainy, blurry pictures because you couldn't find a good balance between shutter speed, amount of light, and iso. Just my 2 cents.

 

[TheFantasticG]

If you understand the basics then it is clear what i meant, since it was directly addressed to you and nobody else. Nothing i've said is false information because if you simply explained yourself instead of childishly kicking the back seat, i could have instructed you or maybe you could have corrected me on something i may have articulated incorrectly. Talking to me in third person and telling me to shut up is not how adults conduct themselves.

Hamlet, stop posting. Seriously. It is clear from your plethora of posts that you are in no position to give advice. I've sat back since you started posting and not disputed any of your ill advised posts as others have done, so no need. Since I'm in this thread already can't just let it slip by and confuse the OP. Given what you have posted thus far on this forum you do not need to instruct anyone on anything yet. Once you have some years of experience and knowledge under your belt then come to the table. On that note: I don't have to explain myself. It's abundantly clear you do not know what you're talking about. You need to read that book I posted a link to. I have read it. I suggest it to every new-to-photography person I meet because it provides a good foundation to build experience on. You need to stop posting "advice" when you do not understand the subject in question. What I have asked of the OP are relevant questions as to correctly give her an opinion on the proper lens purchase to suit her needs. I don't want to give her a bad suggestions so I need more information on her intended use so as to accurately tailor my suggestion to her needs.

I actually never thought about the focus. That would be pretty important to moving targets.

Uh, really? Never thought the focusing abilities of the autofocus module might be important to tracking a moving target? Stop acting like you know more than you do. It's painfully obvious your knowledge is lacking in critical areas. Please, do yourself a favor and buy that book I linked to, then read it.

 

[hamlet]

Whatever you say 50+ auto focus point guy. I've been right all the way to the bank. And i'll admit where i lack knowledge and at that point we all grow a little wiser. But you don't care about any of that, all you want to do is play your little word games. so that's the real painfully obvious truth.

 

[kgirl16]

Thank you.

 

[ratssass]

 

[kgirl16]

I'm sorry I'm shooting in a gymnasium, and outside during the daytime!

 

[jaomul]

The 70-200mm f2.8 is better irregardless of the conditions. The cheaper 70-300 may suffice in Good light. That's the simple answer.

 

[Hosanna]

70-300L will be better, I've heard some reports that it does best the 70-200f4L, but I don't care. The Canon 70-200f4L IS is my threshold for quality and the Tamron 70-300 is very, very close.

 

[robbins.photo]

I just wanted to know what lens would be good.... Now you're telling me that my d5100 is a problem.. awesome.

Kgirl - I use a D5100 myself and I shoot mostly wildlife and some sports so I often find myself firing at a moving target. Your D5100 can handle this fine, it will just take a little practice on your part. Really the big question in regards to the lenses, are you going to be shooting indoors or outdoors, and at daytime or evenings/nights. For outdoor in the daytime you don't necessarily need a wider apeture lens, so the 300 mm would most likely be a better choice (though truthfully I'd recommend going with a Nikon 70-300mm VR 4.5-5.6, I have one and it is a phenomenal lens). If your shooting in lower light then the 200 mm with the wider aperture will be your best bet.

 

[robbins.photo]

I'm sorry I'm shooting in a gymnasium, and outside during the daytime!

Usually gyms have pretty bad lighting so the 200 mm with the wider 2.8 aperture will probably be a better investment for you. I just picked up a Sigma 70-200 mm F2.8 myself, should be arriving in the next day or so, if you'd like I can give you a quick review on how well it does in combination with my own 5100.