fast zoom lenses... Nikon 80-200 f2.8 vs new Tamron 70-200 (non VC version)

johncook

johncook

Messages
103
Name
john
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi guys,

am looking for a fast zoom lens, but dont want to spend £1k+

narrowed it down to the older nikon 80-200 f/2.8 which seems to get some good reviews and the new non VC version of the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8

I've got a tamron 28-75 f/2.8 for my D700 and have to say i've been extremely happy with it.

I've seen some video reviews of the Tamron and it generally seems to be positive, just slightly slow AF speed (compared to the nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR)

will the nikon 80-200 be quicker with respect to auto focus speed than the Tamron?

appreciate any view on the above two lenses.

thanks!
 
Yeah the 80-200 will be quicker although how much quicker will depend on which version you get. Wouldn't waste your time with the Tammy to be honest. What about a Siggy o.s instead?
 
Not slightly slow AF speed, very slow AF speed compared to Nikon and Sigmas offerings. If I were you Id look for a Sigma 70-200 2.8 non OS or OS if budget can stretch. Its the best all rounder imo out of the cheaper fast teles.
 
thanks guys.

the one thing I read about the nikon 80-200 is that it was a pretty sharp lens at all apertures. nice to have a nikon lens too.

the only thing putting me off the sigma is i've seen reviews stating its a bit soft in the centre wide open. not sure how true that is in real life?
 
Sigma has quality control issues when it comes to AF, but youre buying used so can just ask for samples. The OS version costs more but is a better lens and the QC on these is much better than the regular HSM.
 
Be aware that the 80-200 is quite soft and lacking contrast wide open at the long end when focusing near the minimum focus distance, it's a documented issue with the lens so not ideal for head/shoulders portraits at 150-200mm f/2.8. It's why I got rid of mine as that's the end I wanted to be at most.
 
jpw said:
Be aware that the 80-200 is quite soft and lacking contrast wide open at the long end when focusing near the minimum focus distance, it's a documented issue with the lens so not ideal for head/shoulders portraits at 150-200mm f/2.8. It's why I got rid of mine as that's the end I wanted to be at most.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I noticed this.
 
All lenses have there own issues the Siggy for example suffers from focus breathing. You just have to decide what suits your needs best.
 
Soda Farl said:
All lenses have there own issues the Siggy for example suffers from focus breathing. You just have to decide what suits your needs best.
Click to expand...

Quite, the latest Nikon has very pronounced focus breathing that can be problematic depending on how you most use it.
 
grotty said:
Quite, the latest Nikon has very pronounced focus breathing that can be problematic depending on how you most use it.
Click to expand...

Yes, Nikon is very poor for focus breathing - it's more like 150mm at the long end at closer focusing distances. Sigma OS is not much better, nor the new Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC.

All the the Canon 70-200s are significantly better in this respect, and best of all is the older Tamron 70-200 2.8 non-VC (poor AF though).

Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS is a damn good lens and exceptional value for money.
 
It's also worth remembering the screw drive lenses won't take a teleconverter and auto focus if you plan to to use one.

The AF-S 80-200 is quite rare compared to the AF-D versions, and so costs a bit more.
 
+1 for the sigma OS cannot fault mine at all. You are able to pick it up new from around £730 that's over £700 cheaper than the nikon and trust me there's certainly not anywhere near that difference in IQ.
 
If you can find a good S/H Nikon 80-200 AF-S you won't be disappointed but there aren't many around.


{Edit - Grays of Westminster have 3 showing}
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top