Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

2 end

Archive 2014 · 70-200 F4: worth it for the money?

nandadevieast
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · 70-200 F4: worth it for the money?

I can buy this lens or buy a Sigma 85/1.4 that i have been lusting for...
Sigma is actually much cheaper...it will give me 85 and 135mm on crop mode...
I take all kind of pictures, am an extensive traveller. I did buy a D800 an year ago but have been really slow adding up lenses for it. I have a 35/1.4 and a recently bought 300/4 also...and this is to gain a tale'sh option below 300mm.Can't seem to make up my mind.
Here are some of my pictures:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/agnihot
thanks
nde

Jan 16, 2014 at 10:21 AM

VinnieJ
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · 70-200 F4: worth it for the money?

The 70-200 is more versatile while the 85 is faster. Which is more important? Probably something like a fast 135 might be a good compromise. We'll see if Sigma releases that or Nikon update's theirs.

Jan 16, 2014 at 10:26 AM

M635_Guy
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · 70-200 F4: worth it for the money?

I love my 70-200 f/4, but I can't say that choosing between those two lenses is an easy choice. I have the Nikon 85 f/1.8G and it is one of my favorite lenses as well, but I use them for completely different things.

Your images are terrific, and it seems like the Sigma might appeal to you for the pair with your 35mm. I use my 85mm as more of a portrait lens on my D300s.

I travel a fair bit, and the weight and size of the 70-200 (vs. the f/2.8 glass) allows me to keep it in my bag much of the time.

Jan 16, 2014 at 10:32 AM

SAng
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · 70-200 F4: worth it for the money?

Tough choice, but for what you shoot I would lean towards the 85 especially if you still have that 180 that is in your profile. Nice stream btw.

Jan 16, 2014 at 10:32 AM

hijazist
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · 70-200 F4: worth it for the money?

Different lenses for different shooting styles. For traveling which you mention, I think nothing beats the 70-200 F/4 for it's versatility, IQ and weight. Add to that it's great VR system. The 85 1.4 is a very specialized tool mainly for portraits/candids.

I love the Sigma 85 but for your situation I can't but recommend the 70-200. Very nice images BTW

Jan 16, 2014 at 10:33 AM

lara_ckl
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · 70-200 F4: worth it for the money?

Since you asked....

My opinion, for what it is worth.....

85mm.

Also check out the Nikon 85/1.8G. Even cheaper than Sigma.

Jan 16, 2014 at 10:35 AM

nandadevieast
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · 70-200 F4: worth it for the money?

180 is gone. I had soft images wide open, the reason i bought it for.

SAng wrote:
Tough choice, but for what you shoot I would lean towards the 85 especially if you still have that 180 that is in your profile. Nice stream btw.

Jan 16, 2014 at 10:38 AM

nandadevieast
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · 70-200 F4: worth it for the money?

Isn't 85 a 135/2@16megapixel on crop mode?

VinnieJ wrote:
The 70-200 is more versatile while the 85 is faster. Which is more important? Probably something like a fast 135 might be a good compromise. We'll see if Sigma releases that or Nikon update's theirs.

Jan 16, 2014 at 10:40 AM

VinnieJ
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · 70-200 F4: worth it for the money?

nandadevieast wrote:
Isn't 85 a 135/2@16megapixel on crop mode?

Close to it in terms of field of view equivalent but it's the same thing as cropping in post. I believe the biggest advantage of crop mode is clearing your buffer faster. To take advantage of all those pixels the D800 gives you then you would really want a native 135, assuming that focal length would work for you.

Jan 16, 2014 at 10:54 AM

subidiom
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · 70-200 F4: worth it for the money?

Very nice images in your stream! My two cents after reading through this thread and looking at your style of photography would be go for the 70-200 f/4. It fills a hole in your range and would be great for your type of photography. It is a great HQ travel lens as it's very light light weight and versatile and the VR is very useful when you don't have a tripod available. IQ is top notch. When I travel, I leave my 85mm 1.4 at home and take this instead.

That said, you will eventually have both!

Jan 16, 2014 at 11:00 AM

kcartwright27
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · 70-200 F4: worth it for the money?

why not get the 85mm and then look for a used 135mm 2.8 AIS if you are open to manual focus.. My 135mm ais renders beautifully wide open on my d600.. and in crop mode it would get you to that 200mm range.. they are very light and great for travel compared to a larger zoom.
If you are really lusting for the 85mm 1.4 and want that creamy bokeh.. i think you will have buyers remorse if you go with anything else and will eventually buy/sell/trade..etc to get one ..
I was that way with the siggy 35mm 1.4 .. if i had bought anything else i absolutely know I would always say what if.. or that desire would be in the back of my mind. I got the sig and am very happy....no regrets and or looking backwards at a wrong decision

Jan 16, 2014 at 12:07 PM

Smiert Spionam
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · 70-200 F4: worth it for the money?

The 70-200/4 is great, and I was more than impressed by it when I used one over the summer on a second body for an outdoor wedding. As a travel lens, it's fantastic.

It is in no way a substitute for an 85/1.4 (and I believe the Sigma is the best of the bunch). VR doesn't freeze human subjects in low light, and nothing does a loose environmental portrait like a good 85. It's my most used lens on a DSLR, and I would never give it up.

Jan 16, 2014 at 12:33 PM

cohenfive
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · 70-200 F4: worth it for the money?

The 70-200 is a great lens. I actually sold my 2.8 vr1 and got it instead. But as others have said it depends on what you shoot.

Jan 16, 2014 at 02:36 PM

Steve Beck
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · 70-200 F4: worth it for the money?

The 70-200 f4 was the one lens I missed from my Canon days, I ordered a the f4 the day it was available. This lens is VERY sharp through the focal length range. f4 is plenty fast for me and the bokeh is nice for portrait shots. Hard to beat a nice 1.4 or 1.8 prime as well. Get both!

Jan 16, 2014 at 03:53 PM

Jonathan
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · 70-200 F4: worth it for the money?

The 70-200 f4 is so light and sharp, it's one that goes with me a lot. I think it's a super lens. The Sigma is also. I love the bokeh.

I would recommend the 70-200 and add the 85 later.

Jan 16, 2014 at 08:28 PM

Michaelparris
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · 70-200 F4: worth it for the money?

Just picked up the 85 1.8g and the 70-200 f4vr on the buy and sell forum. Have taken both out for a spin. My conclusion 85 is good but the 70-200 is the real deal.....wow. Sharp. Small.compact. Versatile. Love the 85 1.8g but I think the f4 vr will be on the camera much more

Jan 17, 2014 at 12:34 AM

Frogfish
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · 70-200 F4: worth it for the money?

You have a huge gap from 35 to 300mm if I am understanding your lens collection correctly !

In that case for me it's a no-brainer, the 70-200/4 would be a perfect gap filler (especially since you travel a lot, that and your 35 and you're good to go).

I love fast primes but the 85mm really is primarily a portrait lens and although I prefer 100-135mm for that the Sigma is still on my short-list too

The 70-200/4 is universally acknowledged as a superb lens, a real winner, you can't go wrong with it. The 85/1.8g I had and sold. Whilst a wonderful portrait lens (great bokeh and superb value for money) the AF is horrendous in low light especially for fast action.

Jan 17, 2014 at 12:35 AM

nandadevieast
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · 70-200 F4: worth it for the money?

Ok. Guys. I think i will go for the zoom.

I must say though that its a lot pricey for a slow zoom. Should have been 900 bucks.

Thanks.

Jan 17, 2014 at 04:04 AM

Kell
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · 70-200 F4: worth it for the money?

nandadevieast wrote:
Ok. Guys. I think i will go for the zoom.

I must say though that its a lot pricey for a slow zoom. Should have been 900 bucks.

Thanks.

I don't get this Should have been 900 bucks. it's as good as the 2.8 that costs $1000 more except for the F4 instead of 2.8. , of course the 2.8 is built like a tank but allot of people don't need to carry a tank around......with your D800 and high iso F4 should be fine unless you shoot indoor sports with poor lighting...had both, I consider the F4 a bargain......you really think it should be $1500 less?

Edited on Jan 17, 2014 at 08:58 AM · View previous versions

Jan 17, 2014 at 08:51 AM

bocajrs
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · 70-200 F4: worth it for the money?

Yes, although pricey, the 70-200 F4 is worth IMO - I sold my 70-200 2.8 VR1 for it and haven't looked back.

Jan 17, 2014 at 08:53 AM

1 2 end
FM Forums \| Nikon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.