Need some Advice on Lenses: Just made the leap from a crop sensor (D200, 10.3 MP) to full frame (D810, 36 MP). I want to invest in the best full frame glass available. I'm not looking...

Largobob

Just made the leap from a crop sensor (D200, 10.3 MP) to full frame (D810, 36 MP). I want to invest in the best full frame glass available. I'm not looking for cheap....I'm looking for "best" (critically sharp, low distortion, well built, etc)

I currently own the Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 Macro; and the Nikkor 70-200, f/2.8 VR, .... both good+ lenses in my opinion.

I am interested and seek advice on the following:

1) the Nikon AF-S 24-70, f2.8 G ED. (The non-VR model seems sharpest). Is this a sharp lens.....Is there another maker with a better product....Is there another similar focal range that would be more sharp?

2). the Sigma 85mm Art lens. Anything sharper out there?

3). either the Nikkor 200-500, or the Tamron 160-600 G2. Have any of you had both and prefer one over the other?

Thank you in advance for your advice. I ask that you have experience with the various lenses if you answer.

Again.....I am not looking for cheap.....I'm looking for the very best FF glass out there.

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

Largobob wrote:

Just made the leap from a crop sensor (D200, 10.3 ... (show quote)

I have the Nikon 200-500 and would say it would be an asset for your criteria of good glass.
Have fun with your upgrade.

Steve Perry Loc: Sylvania, Ohio

Don't know about the sigma 85 but, the 24-70 G is a nice sharp lens. However, my 24-70E seems even better overall. It took me a few tries to find one I liked, but I did find one (and one of these days I'll learn not to buy lenses the day they come out). The "E" has way better corner sharpness and is pretty close to the "G" in the center. Overall, I'm vey happy with mine.

The Nikon 200-500 is probably the way to go. I had a 150-600 Tamron G2, tested it against the 200-500, the 200-500 was a bit sharper. Although the Tamron does have faster AF and more VR and distance lock options. However, for me, I can't switch to a lens that's not as sharp as my 200-500 (and I hate losing the 1/3rd stop - F6.3 ain't cool IMO). If price is no object, a 500 F4 + 1.4TC might be a better answer for telephoto work.

Largobob

Steve Perry wrote:

Don't know about the sigma 85 but, the 24-70 G is ... (show quote)

Thanks Steve. I value your feedback.

Bridges Loc: Memphis, Charleston SC, now Nazareth PA

I have the Nikon 24-70 2.8 and it is a very good lens. I wanted one with a little more reach so I could do event shooting with one lens. I thought the Nikon 24-120 would do but read mixed reviews on it. Some people love it while others think it just ok. The reviews on the Sigma 24-105 f4 are almost universally good. I went in that direction and do not regret it. It is very solid and produces wonderful shots. For your 85, (and you said price was not so important), check out the Zeiss Mivus 85 1.4. -- at 1799.95 (B&H) it isn't a cheap lens. It is a manual focus lens but at this focal length you should not need a lens built for speed. I would imagine you are looking for that lens to do portrait work.

Largobob

Bridges wrote:

I have the Nikon 24-70 2.8 and it is a very good l... (show quote)

Thanks buddy

delraypiper Loc: Delray Beach, FL

I have both the Tamron 150-600 G2 and the Nikon 200-500. I have used both lenses on a D500, a D810 and a D850. Mostly on birds. Both are excellent lenses, but I feel the 200-500 acquires focus a little faster than the 150-600. The 200-500 is also a little faster at the long end than the Tamron. f5.6 vs f6.3. And I'm on the long end most of the time. I think also that I can track birds better with the 200-500. These observations are, of course, subjective, and perhaps the 200-500 just fits me better than the Tamron. I won't bore you with specific comparisons as there are a great number of them on the web and you can do that research.

I think you'll like either lens and either would serve you well. That said, I do use the 200-500 more than the Tamron.

John D

Largobob

PixelStan77 wrote:

I have the Nikon 200-500 and would say it would be an asset for your criteria of good glass.
Have fun with your upgrade.

Thanks PixelStan..... I value your input

Largobob

delraypiper wrote:

I have both the Tamron 150-600 G2 and the Nikon 20... (show quote)

Thanks John. I appreciate your informed response.

Jerrin1 Loc: Wolverhampton, England

Largobob wrote:

Just made the leap from a crop sensor (D200, 10.3 ... (show quote)

I bought a Nikkor 200 - 500mm f5.6 in preference to the Tamron 150 - 600mm G2 and agree with Steve Perry. He and I also discussed the merits of the 200 - 500mm vs the Nikkor 300mm f4 PF VR +/- the Nikkor TC14EIII on his YouTube channel. You may wish to take a look at the 300mm f4 PF VR as it is beautifully light and provides excellent IQ/sharpness. I love my 300mm, but actually prefer my 200 - 500mm, though it is much heavier.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

Jerrin1 wrote:

I bought a Nikkor 200 - 500mm f5.6 in preference to the Tamron 150 - 600mm G2 and agree with Steve Perry. He and I also discussed the merits of the 200 - 500mm vs the Nikkor 300mm f4 PF VR +/- the Nikkor TC14EIII on his YouTube channel. You may wish to take a look at the 300mm f4 PF VR as it is beautifully light and provides excellent IQ/sharpness. I love my 300mm, but actually prefer my 200 - 500mm, though it is much heavier.

If heft is a problem, you might be able to save some weight with the 80-400mm f4.5-5.6 vrii. Another good lens from Nikon. Because of the focal lengths available on the low end, I'm considering this lens for soccer, basketball and baseball for my 8 year old grandson. On a crop sensor camera the field of view would be 120-600mm. However, I'm aware that the O.P. is shooting full frame.

CO

SteveR wrote:

If heft is a problem, you might be able to save some weight with the 80-400mm f4.5-5.6 vrii. Another good lens from Nikon. Because of the focal lengths available on the low end, I'm considering this lens for soccer, basketball and baseball for my 8 year old grandson. On a crop sensor camera the field of view would be 120-600mm. However, I'm aware that the O.P. is shooting full frame.

I have the Nikon 80-400mm AF-S lens. It's sharp, has great VR, and very fast autofocus. I really think lenses that have the nano crystal coating on the glass have slightly higher contrast than lenses with standard multi-coatings. It has very consistent sharpness througout the zoom range. It weighs about 2/3 of what the 200-500mm weighs.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Largobob wrote:

Just made the leap from a crop sensor (D200, 10.3 ... (show quote)

Some 24-70mm comparisons -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fC3IWsQ_Ms
https://petapixel.com/2016/07/06/tokina-24-70-f2-8-outperforms-nikon-lens-less-half-price/
http://www.ishootshows.com/2010/10/18/comparison-review-tamron-28-75mm-vs-sigma-24-70mm-f2-8/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HV9ju8LmRfU
http://www.diyphotography.net/great-24-70mm-f2-8-shootout-pits-nearly-identical-canon-nikkor-pentax-sony/
http://www.diyphotography.net/tokinas-24-70-vs-nikons-half-price-better-quality/
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=24-70mm+comparison

Up to 600mm -
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=15236
http://www.kruger-2-kalahari.com/tamron-vs-sigma-150-600.html
http://photo.net/equipment/150-600_lenses
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/latest/articles/tamron-vs-sigma-150-600mm-the-7-key-differences-48183
https://photographylife.com/nikon-200-500mm-vs-tamron-150-600mm-vs-sigma-150-600mm-c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLXocpM5xno
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_msTFAmwWY

Boris Ekner Loc: From Sweden, living in Guatemala

Largobob wrote:

1) the Nikon AF-S 24-70, f2.8 G ED. (The non-VR model seems sharpest). Is this a sharp lens.....Is there another maker with a better product....Is there another similar focal range that would be more sharp?

As I understand it, Tamron 24-70 G2 is a far better option.

There are plenty of reviews of it all over internet as well as YouTube.

Here’s the Angry Photographer on Tamron 24-70: https://youtu.be/e9FYd808j4k

He is quite a different personality, nevertheless, very few can compete with his technical knowledge and experience.

Jim Bob

Steve Perry wrote:

Don't know about the sigma 85 but, the 24-70 G is ... (show quote)

Great post, as usual. Your comments on the Tamron G2 are interesting. I have been disappointed with that lens and agree the Nikon 200-500 is better over all. For me the Tamron does not reliably acquire focus and in low light situations is a total loser.