Which 70-200mm 2.8 Should I get?

Trainwizard · Jun 6, 2014

By the end of the summer, I plan to acquire a fast telephoto zoom lens for sports and indoor/dim light events (plays, graduations, weddings). With a budget of less than $999, which would you guys recommend for my D5100?

Tamron 70-200 Di LD Macro = great price BUT slow AF.

Sigma 70-200 APO DG HSM = seems perfect BUT mixed reviews regarding AF speed.

Nikon AF-S 80-200 = fast AF BUT very rare, old AF-S motor reported dying, and 10mm loss at the wide end (focal length is not a dealbreaker).

The gear mentioned in my signature is a PAIN in the ARZE to carry, lens weighs 80KG!!! :mrgreen:

pixmedic · Jun 6, 2014

I have the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 Di IF LD non-VC and love it. it has a built in focus motor, and on my D7100, D7000, and D200 the AF is very quick.
for $1k you might be able to find a Tamron or Sigma VR version used on ebay or a reputable online store that sells used gear like KeH, B&H, or Adorama.

Monday · Jun 6, 2014

Just went through the same thing I ended up with the latest tamron 2.8 vc usd and have been very happy with it from a few quick test shots

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

TheLost · Jun 6, 2014

I liked my non-OS Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 HSMII... However, i'd recommend selling some blood/plasma to get the extra $200 you need for a Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR1 (~$1200 used)

Derrel · Jun 6, 2014

A clean 80-200 AF-S would be my choice. I bought one a few months back in good shape. It's a better lens than the 70-200/2.8 VR on full-frame: much better corners of the frame. Focus speed is very fast. It has much better AF-hold button design on the lens barrel than my 70-200 VR, which I have had since the first week it came out. The 80-200 AF-S is also HUGELY better than the VR-1 when shot right towards the sun, which in all fairness, is one of the VR-1's most glaring and significant weaknesses; it is very poor when shot right toward the sun. The 80-200 AF-S yields one or two very SMALL "dots" when shot toward the setting sun right over the open ocean; the VR-1 will flare out 75% of the entire frame in the same situation. Not that setting sun is an issue in most sports photography, it's not, but you'll end up using a tele-zoom for a lot of things over the course of its life. For under 1k, I think the 80-200 AF-S is the best lens for the money in the $800-$950 range.

You're right about the original Tamron 70-200 macro; it was panned almost universally for horrible focusing performance; I understand that the newest model is MUCH better though. The Sigma has been iterated several times, and I cannot keep track of which Siggy is which.

Mike_E · Jun 6, 2014

IF you're going to shoot DX then the VRl is probably the way to go.

Even in sports- dragging the shutter and panning the sidelines are in fact a thing. VR will help you there

If the above don't interest you the the AF-S would be the next best bet. AF-S is fast to focus. Barring that, go and get a D300s with a grip for the screw drive.

ruifo · Jun 6, 2014

This one:
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...mron-70-200mm-f-2-8-sp-di-vc-usd-opinion.html

Sample shots with a D5200:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ruimc/sets/72157641188279093/

Trainwizard · Jun 6, 2014

Thanks everyone! I still got plenty of time to decide. Ruifo, your photos are amazing!

Danuser · Jun 7, 2014

Derrel said:
A clean 80-200 AF-S would be my choice. I bought one a few months back in good shape.

After debating the alternatives, I bought a used AF-S last year. I love it. So sharp, and the focus speed is great. The lack of VR has not been an issue for me. Heavy as hell, but the results are worth it.

JoeW · Jun 7, 2014

Trainwizard said:
By the end of the summer, I plan to acquire a fast telephoto zoom lens for sports and indoor/dim light events (plays, graduations, weddings). With a budget of less than $999, which would you guys recommend for my D5100?

Tamron 70-200 Di LD Macro = great price BUT slow AF.

Sigma 70-200 APO DG HSM = seems perfect BUT mixed reviews regarding AF speed.

Nikon AF-S 80-200 = fast AF BUT very rare, old AF-S motor reported dying, and 10mm loss at the wide end (focal length is not a dealbreaker).

The gear mentioned in my signature is a PAIN in the ARZE to carry, lens weighs 80KG!!! :mrgreen:

I own the Sigma and am pretty happy with it. I haven't found any AF issues (and I use it mostly to shoot sports at night--fast moving sports like soccer). No AF issues. I can't comment on the other lens since I don't own them.

One issue you may not have looked at (if you haven't owned a bazooka, er...I mean a fast 200mm lens before) is the shear size and weight. Some stadiums or venues will limit the length of lens you can bring in. To you, if it's all macaroni, then forget my point. Otherwise, get the measurements for each and the weight and make that a consideration in your choice. B/c I seem to remember than when I was considering options, the Sigma was the longest (not in terms of focal length but the physical size of the lens) of the four I was looking at.

bigal1000 · Jun 9, 2014

The best one you can afford,I have the older Nikon 80-200 2.8 it's the balls ..........

robbins.photo · Jun 9, 2014

Trainwizard said:
By the end of the summer, I plan to acquire a fast telephoto zoom lens for sports and indoor/dim light events (plays, graduations, weddings). With a budget of less than $999, which would you guys recommend for my D5100?

Tamron 70-200 Di LD Macro = great price BUT slow AF.

Sigma 70-200 APO DG HSM = seems perfect BUT mixed reviews regarding AF speed.

Nikon AF-S 80-200 = fast AF BUT very rare, old AF-S motor reported dying, and 10mm loss at the wide end (focal length is not a dealbreaker).

The gear mentioned in my signature is a PAIN in the ARZE to carry, lens weighs 80KG!!! :mrgreen:

Never had any issues with my Sigma as far as autofocus speed - it's always been fast and accurate on the D5200. I know some folks who have the Tamron and they all say it's also an excellent lens. I got rather fortunate finding a used Sigma 70-200 mm 2.8 w/OS at a price I couldn't pass up and I've been very happy with it myself. So really I don't think there is a "bad" option here.

If you'd like to see some images shot with the Sigma in my signature is a link to my flickr account, the majority of what I shoot is with the Sigma.

Braineack · Jun 9, 2014

I'm in love with my Tamron VC--this can be had used in your budget.

And you can click my Flickr to see shots with it (go to the zoo shots).

Patriot · Jun 9, 2014

I'm waiting until I can find a good 80-200mm 2.8 for a good price. I keep seeing $600+ for this lens. Hopefully my patients pays out.

djacobox372 · Jun 9, 2014

Patriot said:
I'm waiting until I can find a good 80-200mm 2.8 for a good price. I keep seeing $600+ for this lens. Hopefully my patients pays out.

Here's an "auction site" tip: instead of looking for the lens alone look for a camera with the lens. Check completed items to get an idea for what you can resell the camera body and other acessories for, and bid accordingly.

With this method you should be able to get a 80-200mm two ring for $400 or less.