F2.8 Zooms

robp

robp

Messages
423
Name
rob
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,

My photography has progressed from a fairly poor and prematurely curtailed effort in the TP 52 a couple of years back to being paid yer actual (very) modest amounts of money on a weekly basis for snaps of children's footy by my local newspaper. I also get asked now to shoot various functions etc 'Because you've got a good camera.'

It's a D90 and I wonder if I am the only one that gets totally blimmin' infuriated by that statement?

Anyhow, looking to move on and up I am now considering a 24-70 f2.8 and a 70-200 f2.8, along with a D750 but am undecided as to the lens brand.

I would very much appreciate receiving your various views on how noticeable the difference in IQ is between the Nikon versions and their more affordable equivalents from Tamron and Sigma.

Thank you in advance

Rob
 
The Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 is very good considering you can pick them for up ~£150. I was very lucky and got mine on eBay for £110, admittedly minus a hood.
 
I have the Tamron 24-70mm VC, not quite as good as the Nikon (I've had one of those too) but close enough for it to be tough to justify the extra cost. Only real negative for the Tamron is the vignetting at 24mm, it is pretty bad, but not something that bothers me, but it may do you. I've also have both the sigma 70-200 (latest one) and nikon 70-200 VRii, same story as the 24-70 really, Sigma is 95% as good for a lot less money.

I've tried shooting footie with FF and a 70-200, wasn't quite enough, kids football may be different depending on the pitch size, but I'd be a little concerned about loosing the extra reach DX gives you.
 
Last edited:
I've used the tamron 24-70VC granted it was on canon but it was tremendous.

Very quick to focus and didn't hunt even when it was pretty dark at the night time, I was using a 6D though which may have helped.
Lovely and sharp too, its heavy though! Zoom lock feature to stop lens creep is handy.

 
The own brand lenses in both ranges are the best but there are some decent alternatives.

Of the 24-70mm the ones to go for are from tamron all sigmas efforts have reviewed very poorly. The tamron 28-75mm is a real bargain and their 24-70mm vc is close to the nikon/canon level with the added bonus of vc. Another option could be a second hand nikon 28-70mm which is very well thought of.

Of the 70-200mm lenses the ones to go for is the latest OS sigma or the usd vc from tamron. If you want to go cheaper all the older sigmas are decent especially the HSM versions the previous tamron had really slow AF which was a let down on a very sharp lens. You should also consider the nikon 80-200mm it's solid and quality!
 
Thank you for your advice, guys.

I think my mind is now settled on the Sigma 70-200 which I was already very interested in and your comments have reinforced my thoughts.

I couldn't decide on the 24-70 but the Tamron is now favourite, particularly after seeing that lovely bouquet shot, Nick.

I take the point about how much extra quality there is for the extra cash needed for the Nikons and can't really justify it yet.

On the subject of footy, Phil, even on 9v9 sized pitches I find that I have to do quite a crop on images from the opposite side of the pitch even at 300mm on a crop sensor so agree that 200mm on FF would be inadequate. I still intend to use my existing set up for that. This leads me to another question, please: Can I set a D750 to shoot in crop mode when necessary? I've read comments about there being no point in going FF if I'm still going to need a crop sensor but surely to have the flexibility to do both on one camera is a bonus?
 
robp said:
Thank you for your advice, guys.

I think my mind is now settled on the Sigma 70-200 which I was already very interested in and your comments have reinforced my thoughts.

I couldn't decide on the 24-70 but the Tamron is now favourite, particularly after seeing that lovely bouquet shot, Nick.

I take the point about how much extra quality there is for the extra cash needed for the Nikons and can't really justify it yet.

On the subject of footy, Phil, even on 9v9 sized pitches I find that I have to do quite a crop on images from the opposite side of the pitch even at 300mm on a crop sensor so agree that 200mm on FF would be inadequate. I still intend to use my existing set up for that. This leads me to another question, please: Can I set a D750 to shoot in crop mode when necessary? I've read comments about there being no point in going FF if I'm still going to need a crop sensor but surely to have the flexibility to do both on one camera is a bonus?
Click to expand...

Yes you can set the D750 to crop mode. In addition if your using a Nikon DX lens it will automatically detect this ( if you turn this feature on in the menu) so you can switch between DX/FX lenses.
 
Just a completely off the wall idea, but the Sony RX10 will give you a zoom from 24-200 fixed at f2.8. Its a high quality Zeiss lens. Although its a fixed lens you dont really need any others!
Means you can capture the activity from close to far without having to change lenses and possibly miss the moment.
The 1 inch sensor is sufficient for most uses, and newspaper type prints I doubt you would see any difference in quality to a crop or full frame.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top