Telephoto Lens for D90

Messages
2
Edit My Images
No
Afternoon all,

Looking for a little bit of advice on a lens choice. I've got a D90 and I'm looking for a telephoto lens to cover the range of 70-200 or 70-300. I've got a standard lens that covers me up to this point.

Ideally I'd like a f2.8 but having done a bit of research it seems there's a bit of a gap with Nikon lenses from the 70-300 f4.5 at £350 through to the 80-200 f.28 at £1500 with nothing in between.

Both Tamron and Tokina offer a telephoto lens but again looking at f4.5.

Sigma offer the 2.8 70-200 non-OSM which gets good reviews and would appear to be the only option for someone with a budget of £500-600 on a Nikon.

The Nikon 70-300 does look like a good option other than it being f4.5. I'm not set on one type of subject therefore don't want to limit myself by getting this lens and realising it's no good in low light conditions.

Cut a long story short - what telephoto lens would you get for £500-600 on a Nikon?

Any help/advice would be greatly appreciated...
 
You seem to have worked out the options:

f2.8 and shorter distance

f4.5 and an extra 100mm

The new 70-300 from Nikon is a pretty impressive lens for the money and is the one I'm waiting to get. I don't do long range shooting very often so it's good enough for me.
 
Just to clarify, the 80-200 f2.8 isn't going to cost you £1500, or anything near that, they can be picked up s/h from around £350 for the push/pull early ones to around £700 for the AF-S versions and they are all potentially very good lenses.
An 80-200 f2.8 and a 1.4 converter would be a good option within price range IMO.
 
Last edited:
The Sigma 50-250mm f2.8 or the Nikon 80-200mm f2.8 might also be worth looking at.
 
Thanks for the feedback guys. Think I must have been looking at the Nikon 70-200 price.

The Nikon 80-200 seems like a very popular lens although I would prefer to buy new if I can but not tied to it. In the case of buying new would you have any other suggestions for the price/capabilities other than the Sigma?

Having a budget of £600 doesn't mean I have to spend it. Happy to hear of cheaper value for money alternatives if there are any?

Thanks again...
 
As a side note, the 80-200mm Nikons are built like tanks and are a solid (sorry ;)) investment, especially the twin ring D. I went for the AF-S version as one came along at the right time but a D is cheaper and marginally different in performance but very reliable. The AF-S was only produced for a very short period and so they don't come up too often in comparison, they also have AF-S motors and electronics to consider and being at least 9 years old now you should think about the history of the lens and if the AF is quiet or if the motor has been replaced. Mine had a new motor and DC-DC board by Fixation and has been flawless. Just something to think about. Older glass is nothing to be scared of as long as its been looked after.
 
Thanks for the feedback guys. Think I must have been looking at the Nikon 70-200 price.

The Nikon 80-200 seems like a very popular lens although I would prefer to buy new if I can but not tied to it. In the case of buying new would you have any other suggestions for the price/capabilities other than the Sigma?

Having a budget of £600 doesn't mean I have to spend it. Happy to hear of cheaper value for money alternatives if there are any?

Thanks again...

If you don't "need" the constant 2.8 the Nik 70-300 VR is a very capable lens, great IQ and the Vr is a great help in certain situations.

You could then invest the difference (and be able to afford the 70-200/2.8 in about 300 years on current performances).
 
Back
Top