Nikon telephoto zoom lens advice

J

Jez2011

Messages
621
Name
Jez
Edit My Images
No
Looking to add to my lens collection.

Need something that can do:

  • moon shots
  • wildlife
  • photojournalism (maybe)
  • portraits
  • plane shots (live near-ish an airport)
  • Gig photography

Currently have the following:

  • Nikon 35mm f1.8
  • Tamron 17-50 f2.8

Am thinking a 70-200/300 telephoto zoom is probably the best bet, so am looking at the following:

  • Tamron 70-300 VC/USD - seems to be the best bang for your buck
  • Tamron 70-200 f2.8 (2nd hand)
  • Sigma 70-200 HSM II f2.8 (2nd hand)
  • Sigma 70-200 HSM OS f2.8 (2nd hand)
  • Nikon 70-200 f4 (2nd hand)

Budget up to £600 but could stretch a bit further if I had to.

Suggestions/comments/advice welcome, thanks in advance :)
 
The Nikon 70-300 VR is better than the Tamron version (and the Sigmas) but is more expensive. There are usually a couple in the classifieds section.
 
Right, thanks. The reviews I've seen have the Tamron (VC USD model) as being slightly ahead of the Nikon though:

The question of the day is, of course, whether it can beat or at least match the quality of its direct competitor - the Nikon AF-S 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR. Well, it gives and takes a little. Optically they're close regarding sharpness, but the Tamron has a little less distortion, a lot less CAs and a bit higher contrast at the long end wide open. In addition, it has a slight edge with respect to build quality. AF speed is basically on the same level. So, in summary the Tamron represents a slightly better value offer, however anyone interested in the lens should check for himself whether the very solid viewfinder image as described in the introduction is a welcome feature or an issue in the field.

http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/619-tamron70300f456fx?start=2
Click to expand...



Tamron gets 2.5/3 for optical quality, Nikon gets 2.5:

http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/620-nikon70300f4556vrfx?start=2

:thinking:
 
The unfortunate answer is that there isn't a single lens that will cover all bases.

For example, at a gig you'll be looking for a fast aperture, and a 70-200mm f2.8 would probably complement your current kit but for wildlife shots you are going to want a fair bit more focal length, where I would be tempted to suggest something like the sigma 150-500mm.

I think you need to list your subjects in priority order.

I would rule out a 70-300mm straight away, as for your needs its a jack of all trades, master of none - too slow for gigs, not great for portraits and not really enough reach for moon / wildlife
 
The Tamron may be regarded as better value but the Nikon is better (IME). While the 70300 range can be a bit of a JOAT, it's a hell of a lot lighter than a 70-200 f/2.8 or a 150-500 (I used to have all 3 and now have just the 70-300). The downside of the Nikon 70-300 is its incompatibility with the Nikon teleconverters, although they are of limited use on consumer grade lenses anyway (IMO).

It all boils down to horses for courses. If you're going to be using the thing professionally, a 70-200 may be a better bet. If you need the extra reach, get the 150-500. If you're happy with the compromise, a 70-300 is a good one!
 
If you are serious about wildlife and plane shots, don't waste time with these slow zooms (perhaps except for the new 80-400). Add a long prime lens to your setup.

AF-S 300 f/4D and 1.4x is not far from your budget.
 
Not sure if this helps but I have the Tamron 70-300 VC on my canon 7D and the Nikon 70-300 VR on my D7000, different camera manufacturers I know which could account for the differences in output but I consistently find the Tamron to be sharper although not massively, they are both great lenses. The Nikon is the quieter of the two but again not by much. Focus speed I find to be much the same.
 
Thanks for all the replies, food for thought!

Re reach, I have seen impressive (to me) moon photos on here and flickr taken with a 70-300 though.

I also thought the f2.8 is not so crucial these days as the latest bodies have such good high ISO performance? Thinking of upgrading to a D7100 at some point.
 
I've had a few decent moon shots with my 70-300VR. Overall, it's a great lens with quick AF but no doubt you'll want something quicker.

Personally, I'd rather a quick lens than be bumping the iso.
 
Hi,

Am I right in thinking that the Nikon 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 G AF-S VR IF-ED Lens on the D3100 will actually give 105-450 because of the difference between the DX and FX?

I was thinking about this for my D7000 and it is currently around £439 on Amazon.

Please let me know if I'm wrong.

John
 
You are right in as much as it will give you the same angle of view as a 105-450mm would on an fx camera.

There are other technical reasons why it's different but if you do a search in the talk basics you'll find all the technically correct answers.

Hope that makes a bit of sense
 
If you can buy used on here John, it would save you upto £150
 
mpe said:
If you are serious about wildlife and plane shots, don't waste time with these slow zooms (perhaps except for the new 80-400). Add a long prime lens to your setup.

AF-S 300 f/4D and 1.4x is not far from your budget.
Click to expand...

Agree with this one. Make sure you get the AF-S version so it can take the TC-14.

One of your other options (the 70-200 F/4) is a none starter for £600.

Not least as I cant imagine anyone selling theirs. They are such a great lens.
 
Thegreatroberto said:
Agree with this one. Make sure you get the AF-S version so it can take the TC-14.

One of your other options (the 70-200 F/4) is a none starter for £600.

Not least as I cant imagine anyone selling theirs. They are such a great lens.
Click to expand...

Yeah, on reflection I was being a bit optimistic there...!

Wildlife is probably lowest priority, I really want a do-it-all lens, though I know these don't really exist :(
 
£2799? How many have you got on order Stewart?!

TBH, if the D800 wasn't so fantastic and Canons fitted my paws, I could be tempted after a play...
 
This may as well not exist yet either. Nobody has tested it, we don't know how well it will actually perform, yet right away people jump at it like its a god send, lol. Sorry, but they can keep it. I have never been into "do all" lenses. This one will be over 1.4kg, so when you think do-all, that's do all with tired arms. Think I'd rather use a few primes and use the energy to just move.

Anything I'd want to shoot at thelonger end is going to be outdoors, so no real need for 2.8. And if I was ever going to spend that much on a lens I'd already have the 300 2.8. But I went cheap and got the 300 f/4 + a TC. It's all the reach I need, and I don't need to carry it around everywhere.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
This may as well not exist yet either. Nobody has tested it, we don't know how well it will actually perform, yet right away people jump at it like its a god send, lol. Sorry, but they can keep it. I have never been into "do all" lenses. This one will be over 1.4kg, so when you think do-all, that's do all with tired arms. Think I'd rather use a few primes and use the energy to just move.
Click to expand...

Nod said:
£2799? How many have you got on order Stewart?!

TBH, if the D800 wasn't so fantastic and Canons fitted my paws, I could be tempted after a play...
Click to expand...


<cough>

Key technology features of the lens are as follows:

• Apherical optics used on all elements except for front SSC coated element
• Pro quality optics on a par with L series lens quality
• Robust design with build quality equivalent to L series lenses
• Image intensifying optics used in front element of lens
• Lens feature full time mechanical manual focusing

• Fully flocked throughout to prevent internal reflections
• One touch design for speed of zooming
• Optical image stabiliser with 6 stop correction for handshake
• Lens supplied with removable tripod mount
Click to expand...

'fully flocked throughout'. What? :LOL:
 
If I'm not mistaken, it's mid August not April.

BTW Gary, you just lost that bet! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top