Replacing a 70-200?

Moderated by: guardian

Visit the FM Store · Image Upload · Buy & Sell
FM Forum Rules
Nikon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums | Nikon-mount SLRs | Join Image Upload
end

Rodolfo Paiz
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #1 · Replacing a 70-200?

Short-term cash needs require me to sell my 70-200 VR. I need to replace it with another lens, hopefully a 'tweener to be used only for a year or so until cash flow gets stronger and I can afford to buy back some of the pro gear I'm letting go now.

The goal is to get great IQ at a much lower cost than the Nikon 70-200. Variations in focal length are OK, and so is using two lenses. But I'd like the short end of the solution to start around 50-70mm and go out to at least 200mm. I use D300 bodies, so DX/FX is irrelevant as I can use any lens.

What would you recommend?

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Edited on Sep 05, 2008 at 06:48 AM

Sep 05, 2008 at 06:46 AM

Jammy Straub
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #2 · Replacing a 70-200?

85mm f/1.8 + 180mm f/2.8

Cheap and excellent IQ. Add the 50mm f/1.8 if you like

Where are all the people recommending the Tokina 50-135?

Sep 05, 2008 at 08:16 AM

NikonAndy
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #3 · Replacing a 70-200?

What about the 70-300 VR? I've heard a lot of great things about that lens.

Sep 05, 2008 at 08:36 AM

Jammy Straub
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #4 · Replacing a 70-200?

NikonAndy wrote:
What about the 70-300 VR? I've heard a lot of great things about that lens.

Oh snaps... your suggestion is better than mine...

The obvious can be so elusive sometimes can't it

Sep 05, 2008 at 09:03 AM

louis fusco
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #5 · Replacing a 70-200?

50-150?, version 1 of the sigma 70-200 hsm?

Sep 05, 2008 at 09:22 AM

firewireguy
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #6 · Replacing a 70-200?

I'd look at either of these:

Nikon 70-300, Sigma 50-150 or Sigma 70-200 2.8 HSM

Sep 05, 2008 at 09:28 AM

Seismo
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #7 · Replacing a 70-200?

I have both the 70-300 and the 70-200 and they're equally sharp. The 70-200 is faster but the 70-300 is a lot cheaper.

Edited on Sep 05, 2008 at 12:52 PM

Sep 05, 2008 at 12:52 PM

Mark Kenfield
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #8 · Replacing a 70-200?

a used Nikon AF 80-200mm f/2.8 doesn't do too much damage to the wallet these days.

Sep 05, 2008 at 01:11 PM

traveler
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #9 · Replacing a 70-200?

My thoughts on that is that there are 2 ways to go. Either a 70-300vr which can be very sharp, no speed demon but good end results overall, and will run you around $450. The other option if you wish to retain that typical 70-200 range and get great IQ but are willing to sacrifice a bit of focus speed, the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 LD is a great choice. I happen to own both and they both have their place. If you're looking to isolate the subject you won't beat the Tamron, no matter how much you spend on a zoom. Figure on about $700 for that choice. The Tamron is pretty sharp at the center but retains excellent sharpness in the corners. Wide open the Nikkor is a bit less so in the corners but has the sharpness in the center wide open, but that's not at f2.8 remember. The Tamron by f3.5 is scary sharp all across the frame (I've tested mine with resolution charts to determine this as well.) Nice build as well, but like I said, if you get the Tammy in lower light the focus slows considerably so it's not a low light sports lens by any means. In good light it does just fine.

Sep 05, 2008 at 02:32 PM

gavin
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #10 · Replacing a 70-200?

I have 7 70-300,s (they are our go to glass for ski pics) and they are probably the best value for money lense on the market.
I have sold billboard pics taken with this little wonder, it's sharp as a tack, quick focusing, small and built OK.
If you don't need a fast lense and don't shoot alot of low light stuff it's a no brainer.
Gav

Sep 05, 2008 at 02:41 PM

R. Francois
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #11 · Replacing a 70-200?

yeah get a 70-300 VR. And if you want stellar IQ: go for a tokina 50-135 F2.8 you will be amazed and never look back

Sep 05, 2008 at 02:53 PM

Andre Labonte
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #12 · Replacing a 70-200?

How about the 80-200 AF-D?

Sep 05, 2008 at 03:50 PM

Rodolfo Paiz
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #13 · Replacing a 70-200?

First, thanks to everyone for the advice. I appreciate the time taken. I'll try to figure out a fair price for my 70-200 and have it on the B&S board in a day or so.

I've looked at every lens suggested (even Andre's late entry

), and I've decided to buy a 70-300VR. Seems like the best choice for this need, covers all the bases for the least amount of money, has good IQ, and will serve well from now until that time when I can repurchase a 70-200VR for the fast aperture and gorgeous bokeh.

Sep 05, 2008 at 04:18 PM

traveler
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #14 · Replacing a 70-200?

the bokeh on the 70-300vr is NOT a weakness....pretty darned good if I do say so. You just might not feel so compelled to reinvest in the 70-200vr.

Sep 05, 2008 at 05:54 PM

Rodolfo Paiz
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #15 · Replacing a 70-200?

Nothing wrong with that if it turns out that way.

Sep 05, 2008 at 05:56 PM


FM Forums \| Nikon-mount SLRs \| Join Image Upload end