24-70 f2.8 or 70-200 f2.8

cotty332000

cotty332000

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,618
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
Yes
I've recently been shooting more and more kids at the park type stuff.

People see the shots I've done of my own kids and want some of the same!:thinking:

I currently use a Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and a Nikon 50mm f1.8!

I'm finding that the Tamron's auto focus is too slow for young kids on the move!:bang:

I fully intend to go FF in the future, so at the expense of some of my DX glass i want to invest in a decent FX lens!

I think that the 24-70 would be my best option to go with,but would just like some advice from people!:thumbs:

Has anyone got any experience with the Tamron equivalents as I've read good reviews?

Or is the 70-200 f2.8 the best choice of lens for this type of photography?:thinking:
 
I tend to like the Photozone reviews and they consider the Tamron 24-70 to be a very good price/performance lens. :)
http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/789-tamron2470f28fx

Regarding 24-70 vs 70-200 they're really very different lenses... if you already have the 17-50 for wide angle stuff then you could consider going for a 70-200 lens as you'd have most focal lengths covered then if you needed wide angle or a telephoto (obviously only missing the 50-70mm range). By the time you go FF you'd probably want to consider saving up for both of those lenses anyway as it can be handy to have a telephoto sometimes, I certainly enjoy my Canon 70-200.
 
Don't forget if your going to use them on your D7000 till you go full frame,the 1x6 crop factor.
In that the case i would go for the 24-70 F2.8 first,then maybe add the 70-200 later :)
 
I use my 70-200 for this sort of thing I find it excellent as you can stand far enough away not to be in the faces of the kids. They act far more naturally when they don't realise you are taking the picture.
 
Thanks for the replies guys!

I will be using the lens on my D7000 and also keeping it as a backup once I go FF.

I was thinking Tamron 24-70 as I've always been happy with my Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and a lot of what I've read says that although the Nikon 24-70 is excellent it seems a little over priced!
 
For me without a doubt it would be the 70-200. I use mine almost all the time for portraits and outdoor shoots at the park. As an example this was shot at f3.5 at 150mm.



Jessica by Don't like to be Bored, on Flickr
 
I also love mine - almost permanently attached to the camera. It is a fair old weight, but the VR2 is amazing - you will not regret owning one.
 
It all depends on your personal preference. I prefer wide angles to teles so I would go for the 24-70. However, I recently upgraded my Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 to the Nikkor 24-120 f/4 VR, mainly for the VR but the extra reach is no handicap! I have a 70-200 in the cupboard but it's the 70-300 VR that lives in the bag.
 
simonblue said:
Don't forget if your going to use them on your D7000 till you go full frame,the 1x6 crop factor.
In that the case i would go for the 24-70 F2.8 first,then maybe add the 70-200 later :)
Click to expand...

Agree. I used to have a 70-200 on my D300 and found I would not use it much - its much better on my D700 (FF). Go for the 24-70, you will use it a lot and its a brilliant lens.
 
sk66 said:
"kids at the park"...70-200, no question.
Click to expand...

+1

As said, using a longer focal length will keep you at a distance which is good when it comes to kids as you'll get more natural shots. You'll also get excellent separation, which can sometimes be critical and you will also get a better compressed perspective when shooting long.
 
sk66 said:
Only for lighter weight or lower light. I don't really need f/1.x for anything if I have room and light.
Click to expand...

wrong. The images just pop at f/1.x. That is the whole point, not about fading light. Portraits in the park at f/8 look just awful. Well most of them.
 
Tractor Boy said:
For me without a doubt it would be the 70-200. I use mine almost all the time for portraits and outdoor shoots at the park. As an example this was shot at f3.5 at 150mm
Click to expand...

Nick,I take it this was shot with your Sigma 70-200 f2.8?

If so how do you rate it?

I can get a siggy for virtually half the price of the Nikon and was wondering if the image difference was worth an extra £800.:thinking:

If anyone else has any experience with 3rd party alternatives your opinions would be most welcome!:thumbs:
 
sk66 said:
This should say "when shooting from longer distances." It's the distance that causes the perspective, not the lens.
Click to expand...

Good point, but then you have to put more distance between you and the subject if shooting with a longer focal length to achieve the same framing of the subject so it kind of comes hand in hand - but I agree it better to be specific :)
 
cotty332000 said:
Nick,I take it this was shot with your Sigma 70-200 f2.8?

If so how do you rate it?

I can get a siggy for virtually half the price of the Nikon and was wondering if the image difference was worth an extra £800.:thinking:

If anyone else has any experience with 3rd party alternatives your opinions would be most welcome!:thumbs:
Click to expand...

Have you considered the Nikon AF 80-200mm f/2.8D ED? There's a few going at MPB with one going at £500 (link) It may not have a silent wave motor (you'll pay a lot more for the AF-S version) but the AF is still meant to be very fast and the optics are considered to be excellent. Check out Ken Rockwell's review here: LINK
 
gman said:
Have you considered the Nikon AF 80-200mm f/2.8D ED? There's a few going at MPB with one going at £500 (link) It may not have a silent wave motor (you'll pay a lot more for the AF-S version) but the AF is still meant to be very fast and the optics are considered to be excellent. Check out Ken Rockwell's review here: LINK
Click to expand...

Not aware of this lens,I will look into it thanks!:thumbs:
 
cotty332000 said:
Nick,I take it this was shot with your Sigma 70-200 f2.8?

If so how do you rate it?

I can get a siggy for virtually half the price of the Nikon and was wondering if the image difference was worth an extra £800.:thinking:

If anyone else has any experience with 3rd party alternatives your opinions would be most welcome!:thumbs:
Click to expand...

Hi,

Yep that was with the Siggy. It is a great lens for a lot less money (I paid about £330 for mine) than the Nikon. Mine is sharp enough at 2.8 and tack sharp from 3.5 upwards. That said I will be upgrading at some point to the Nikon as I need VR for weddings as shutter speeds can be hard to get decent in churches and I have a slightly tremble in the hand!!

Overall a cracking lens for the money. If you don't need the VR then the 80-200 Nikon is a good compromise.

As for using on a crop I never had any issues on the D300 - you just take a couple of steps backwards!!!!

Nick
 
Last edited:
Tractor Boy said:
Hi,

Yep that was with the Siggy. It is a great lens for a lot less money (I paid about £330 for mine) than the Nikon. Mine is sharp enough at 2.8 and tack sharp from 3.5 upwards. That said I will be upgrading at some point to the Nikon as I need VR for weddings as shutter speeds can be hard to get decent in churches and I have a slightly tremble in the hand!!

Overall a cracking lens for the money. If you don't need the VR then the 80-200 Nikon is a good compromise.

As for using on a crop I never had any issues on the D300 - you just take a couple of steps backwards!!!!

Nick
Click to expand...

Thanks Nick!

I take it £330 was 2nd hand?
Pro camera shop have an 80-200 f2.8 that works out roughly £640 via bank transfer which is very tempting!
 
cotty332000 said:
Thanks Nick!

I take it £330 was 2nd hand?
Pro camera shop have an 80-200 f2.8 that works out roughly £640 via bank transfer which is very tempting!
Click to expand...

Yep I bought it from here in the classifieds. The only thing to watch with the likes of Pro Camera Shop is it may be a grey import - not a huge issue to most but some are not aware.

Might be worth considering the sigma 70-200 OS which is at Onestop digital for £686 new :shrug:
 
Tractor Boy said:
Yep I bought it from here in the classifieds. The only thing to watch with the likes of Pro Camera Shop is it may be a grey import - not a huge issue to most but some are not aware.

Might be worth considering the sigma 70-200 OS which is at Onestop digital for £686 new :shrug:
Click to expand...

Thanks!

Yea I'm fully aware of grey imports!
I can't find a UK seller for the Nikon 80-200 f2.8!
 
I think they stopped selling them in the UK some time ago.

I got a grey import 80-200 from a mail order place in the UK before they went bump and its an awesome lens. AF is nice and fast and having used it for around 3 years I can't say I'd spend any more for the 70-200
 
neil_1980 said:
I think they stopped selling them in the UK some time ago.

I got a grey import 80-200 from a mail order place in the UK before they went bump and its an awesome lens. AF is nice and fast and having used it for around 3 years I can't say I'd spend any more for the 70-200
Click to expand...

Thanks!
I am shooting more an more kids and need nice fast AF!
I fancy a Nikon as opposed to a 3rd party so I don't get issues when I do go full frame!
My Tamron 17-50 f2.8 wont af in live view on my D7000 which is a known issue but would like to avoid these little quirks by sticking with Nikon!
 
I've got the 17-50 Tamron as well though hardly use it with what I photograph.

Unless you're tight for space the 80-200 would be my choice everytime. And I say that owning a cropped and a FF.
 
I've got a Nikon 24-70 on my D7000 and its great. I also have the Sigma 70-200 OS and that is also in my opinion a lovely lens. The 4 stops of stabilization really work wonders. Mine is nice and sharp all the way through.
Really cant fault either lens
 
Thanks for all the replies guys!:thumbs:

Lee by showing images like that,which is exactly what I'm hoping to achieve my bank balance is looking like it's going to take a hit!:lol:

I've always dreamed of owning a Nikon 70-200 f2.8:love:
 
cotty332000 said:
Thanks for all the replies guys!:thumbs:

Lee by showing images like that,which is exactly what I'm hoping to achieve my bank balance is looking like it's going to take a hit!:lol:

I've always dreamed of owning a Nikon 70-200 f2.8:love:
Click to expand...

I have owned third party lenses and the Nikon ones. I'm not being a snob. The Nikons are just better. I did have the Nikon 80-200 2.8 but it was tricky to use, where as the 70-200 is not....it works flawlessly.

Personally I would save your pennies and get the Nikon. It will stay with you longer than any bodies. Also be perfect if you decide to go full frame. :thumbs:
 
cotty332000 said:
Thanks!

Yea I'm fully aware of grey imports!
I can't find a UK seller for the Nikon 80-200 f2.8!
Click to expand...

You can't get them new anymore but MPB Photographic have several as do Grays of Westminster.


Have a look at these shots taken with this lens and on your camera: LINK
 
Last edited:
surfg1mp said:
I have owned third party lenses and the Nikon ones. I'm not being a snob. The Nikons are just better. I did have the Nikon 80-200 2.8 but it was tricky to use, where as the 70-200 is not....it works flawlessly.

Personally I would save your pennies and get the Nikon. It will stay with you longer than any bodies. Also be perfect if you decide to go full frame. :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Thanks Lee!:thumbs:

I am in the very fortunate position of being able to afford the nikon 70-200 f2.8 and as I've already said it's a lens I've always dreamed of owning!:love:
I think that after all the fantastic replies and the options available I'm going to get the Nikon 70-200 f2.8!
WEX have it in stock for £30 more than the cheapest option on camerapricebuster.co.uk so think I will order 1 from there before my next kids shoot!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top