Last Christmas I somehow received a D90 kit under the tree. I like you, have been learning a new camera system. Simply put the 18-105 lens is a great lens and a lot of fun to shoot with but, it wouldn't apply to every subject that I wanted to shoot so I started to research other lenses. Digital slr's are a new way to photograph for me, I love it and am still learning. My background is with Hasselblad cameras and Zeiss lenses who I worked for until 1999. Thinking manually about composing a photo versus auto everything takes a little getting used to. From my prior experience I learned that it's the actual transfer of the image to the film plane/sensor that determines the overall quality of a lens. the artistic side comes in on the settings that you choose (f-stop-shutter speed-composition of subject)but overall it all starts with the lens ability to transfer the image to the film plane.
a few of the factors that determine the quality of a lens are the actual lens design and the anti-reflective coating used by the lens manufacturer. Each element in a lens has the potential to cause a reflection which is why the anti-reflective coating used is so very important.
Yes I bit the bullet and bought the 70mm-200mm VRII lens this past spring. two of my daughters swam in our local swim team and the swim team meets were in the evening. the available light went from late afternoon sunlight to floodlights in and around the different pools at which they swam. the results that i got made me extremely happy that I went with the nikon lens.Also I would suggest RAW mode instead of JPEG as when you edit your pictures in your computer program it allows you to edit your pics much more than JPEG.
70-200mm lens comparison between brands that fit nikon mount
(32 posts) (16 voices)-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
you will not be happy shooting field sports with a 200mm. i am about to buy the 300 2.8 just for that purpose, and i plan on using it with teleconverters frequently (FX). the vrII is pretty good at f8 with a tc-20eiii. this makes it a 140-400 on FX and a 210-600 on DX. it is more money though.
for wedding the 70-200 is great. if you can try them (the ones you're looking at) i would highly recommend that.
don't worry about focal breathing. it is actually helpful if you don't want to change lenses, but want to go wider that 70 (i think it is meant to be about 60mm breathing on close focus on the nikon)
but if you are indoors a lot, the fact that the sigma and tamron can focus to 1m instead of 1.4m will be very helpful.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Thanks Steve M & Gareth, appreciate your comments.
I would love to take the plunge too and a bit part of me wants to buy the Nikon as its a long term investment but been hit with a lot of bills lately and I'm pretty much mulling now between the OS sigma and the nikon vrII, I will be going to various stores in the next couple of weeks and taking test shots so hopefully that will help me make up my mind...
Posted 2 years ago # -
I'm looking at a 70-200 F/2.8 - the Nikkor VR II version, but I want to ask, how is it with the TC-14E II and the TC-17E II?
I would be using it on the Nikon D700 or Nikon D3S.
The 70-200mm is the missing link in lenses I don't have (already have 24-70mm and 200-400mm, along with some prime lenses).
Posted 2 years ago # -
i used to use the 70-200 VRII with the tc-20eIII until I bought the 300 2.8G.
my guess is if you get the 70-200 you will not use it with converters. it needs to be stopped down two stops to be sharp, making it f8 with the tc20.
i always use the 300 2.8 instead of converters on the 70-200 now I have it. I can't imagine wanting to compromise image quality just for the sake of the lighter weight if i were you and had the 200-400.
that said, i seldom use the 70-200 now, the results i get using the 300 2.8 and even the 50 1.4G (and soon the 35 1.4) are more pleasing to me.
I wish i had a lense that is shorter than the 300, but has the same image quality and bokeh. In other words i wish I had the 200 F2 and the 85 f1.4G instead of the 70-200.
But i am planning on using the 70-200 on my d700 and the 300 on my d300s with a black rapid double for feild sports.
Posted 2 years ago # -
JohnSeb, have you considered buying via gumtree (similar to craig). You can get the used VR1 for around A$1600-A$1800.
I am using d90 and just bought the VR2 few months ago. The bokeh is amazing and as others have said, the AF is very fast.
cheers
Posted 2 years ago # -
Gareth said:
i used to use the 70-200 VRII with the tc-20eIII until I bought the 300 2.8G.my guess is if you get the 70-200 you will not use it with converters. it needs to be stopped down two stops to be sharp, making it f8 with the tc20.
i always use the 300 2.8 instead of converters on the 70-200 now I have it. I can't imagine wanting to compromise image quality just for the sake of the lighter weight if i were you and had the 200-400.
Well, I ended up borrowing the Zoom-Nikkor 70-200mm F/2.8G VRII lens, putting it on the D700 and using the 24-70mm on the D3S for that assignment. I had the 70-200 for the weekend before it needed to go back, so I tried it with the 1.4x TC and 1.7x TC. The results were okay - but not quite as good as I've had with the 200-400mm on a 1.4x TC (which can be very sharp).
I don't think I'll end up buying the 70-200mm just yet. I think I'll just borrow that lens for the times I need one. Was really pleased with the sharpness of that lens however without using the TC. Even full size images were really sharp.
For me, the 200-400 covers the 200-400 range quite well and I don't see the need for the 300 2.8 at the moment. Must admit, the D3S using ISO12800 and the 200-400 wide open at F/4.0 is a superb combination at night.
Posted 2 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
