p.1 #1 · Another one of these lens threads - 180mm vs 80-200mm vs 70-300mm
To be paired with d600 once enough funds are accumulated
180mm - supposedly great image quality, smaller than the zoom alternative, cheaper at $400 used
80-200mm AF-D - zoom! heavier, worse image quality/rendering than 180mm? more expensive at $600-700 used
Tamron/Nikon 70-300 - slow, worse image quality than 180, how does it compare to 80-200 stopped down sine d600 is quite capable at high iso? And of course longer reach on fx and cheapest at $300 used. However, no TC use
To be honest i am probably going to eliminate the 70-300 as i would assume the image quality does not compare (would love to be proven wrong)
I've used primes, and of course they are not as convenient, but still very workable. This will be my only lens purchase in awhile and only lens to cover that range for awhile. I would love to get into some type of either photojournalism or event photography, therefore im assuming a zoom will serve me more, but this is kind of a pipe dream at the moment.
p.1 #2 · Another one of these lens threads - 180mm vs 80-200mm vs 70-300mm
What sort of events are you shooting? Indoor, outdoor, nighttime, stadium lighting? Sports? Dance? Trenchmonkey can show some wonderful shots with the 70-300.
p.1 #3 · Another one of these lens threads - 180mm vs 80-200mm vs 70-300mm
I had an 80-200 and traded due the weight to pick up the 180. The 80-200 is also very sharp so I personally would not say the 180 is sharper.
The 180 is just such a great lens in such a small light package. I am a prime guy and have taken just a 35 and the 180 on vacation. However there are times where I wish I had both so I had the option of pulling the 80-200 for sure.
I am sure you have seen many examples and not a great one but it is more interesting to show a pic..
p.1 #4 · Another one of these lens threads - 180mm vs 80-200mm vs 70-300mm
The 180 is sharper than the 80-200, especially when using a large aperture at close distance. I have both lenses and if one of them *had* to be sold, it would be the 80-200.
p.1 #5 · Another one of these lens threads - 180mm vs 80-200mm vs 70-300mm
We do Event Photography and I like zooms.
The 180 does sound like a good deal to me though, but to make it work you would have to pretty much take the same shot all day.
My wife can do that but I have to keep moving around.
When shooting MotoCross, I often cover several jumps and a curve from one place.
That is not possible with a fixed lens.
My favorite lens is the AF-S 28-300 VR. We have two of them.
I often use the entire range.
We only pull out the AF-S 80-200 in very low light but I would choose it over the 180mm.
p.1 #6 · Another one of these lens threads - 180mm vs 80-200mm vs 70-300mm
I use my 80-200 at 80mm quite a bit, mid-length 140-145mm and 200mm about equally, so for me it's an easy choice. Probably 80% of my shots are wide open, and it's plenty sharp and useable throughout its range. Of course, my usage runs more toward sports, candid shots at events and overall "photojournalism" type shooting, so the weight/size is the trade-off for versatility.
p.1 #7 · Another one of these lens threads - 180mm vs 80-200mm vs 70-300mm
pdxflint wrote:
I use my 80-200 at 80mm quite a bit, mid-length 140-145mm and 200mm about equally, so for me it's an easy choice. Probably 80% of my shots are wide open, and it's plenty sharp and useable throughout its range. Of course, my usage runs more toward sports, candid shots at events and overall "photojournalism" type shooting, so the weight/size is the trade-off for versatility.
well this answered my question, i will be using it for "photojournalism" type shooting as well. Thank you everyone for contributing!
p.1 #9 · Another one of these lens threads - 180mm vs 80-200mm vs 70-300mm
When you are talking about the difference in sharpness on these kinds of pro lenses, keep in mind there will likely be no difference at all if you aren't using a tripod.
