I would love to have a 70-200mm lens. Can anyone comment on Nikon vs. Tamron? Other than Tamron costs way less !! Thanks.
I bought nikon because of its proven track record. Every time i use it i bitch because it isn't long enough and will not focus close enough but it is still my third most used lens and i would get another if something happened to it. It really shines on my F4 with the big prism.
The only reason I would get a 2.8 is to put a 2X TC behind it when needed. And, were I to do that, I would prefer the Nikon which is just a tick better optically. I would also put a 1.4X behind it. ......The f4's - you can also put a 1.4X behind. Tamron and Tokina also now make F4 versions.
I would love to have a 70-200mm lens. Can anyone comment on Nikon vs. Tamron? Other than Tamron costs way less !! Thanks.
I have been a big fan of the Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 models, but this past winter I sold them and bought the VC Tamrons for my rental inventory. Excellent results from them.
I have been a big fan of the Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 models, but this past winter I sold them and bought the VC Tamrons for my rental inventory. Excellent results from them.
I have been a big fan of the Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 models, but this past winter I sold them and bought the VC Tamrons for my rental inventory. Excellent results from them.
Mt, what kind of deal are you offering on a used 105d macro?
Mt, what kind of deal are you offering on a used 105d macro?
Not a very good one since I don't have any of them right now. They do come in from time to time and usually sell right around $400 depending on condition.
Gene51Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
jtg wrote:
I would love to have a 70-200mm lens. Can anyone comment on Nikon vs. Tamron? Other than Tamron costs way less !! Thanks.
Nikon is better, but not by a whole lot. Depending on which camera you have, you might be able to find a bargain with a 80-200 F2.8 AF-D. These are quite sharp, but do not have an silent wave motor in them for focusing, so you won't be able to use them with a consumer-level body, since they don't have a focus drive in them. The average used cost is between $500 and $600, and though it is an old design, you can get a brand new one for around $1100. And I think it is better than the current Tamron.
I recently shot my first fashion show using the Tamron 70-200 2.8 on a Canon 5d Mark iii. The results were stunning. Super clear. (of course advise that I got from UHH helped quite a bit. I would highly recommend this lens without hesitation.
jtg wrote:
I would love to have a 70-200mm lens. Can anyone comment on Nikon vs. Tamron? Other than Tamron costs way less !! Thanks.