Help with longish lens decision for Nikon

B

bulb763

Suspended / Banned
Messages
711
Name
Jon
Edit My Images
Yes
I have had my camera gear for nearly 12 months now. When I decided I wanted to take up the hobbey, I made the conscious decision to go in at the cheap end, so that if I didn't like it, I wouldn't have wasted too much money, and I would have a decent DSLR (D50) for general pics. And if I did enjoy it, I could always upgrade. I bought a 2nd-hand Sigma 70-300 to go with my kit lens, and away I went...

Now I have been bitten by the bug, and I am finding that the lens I use most is my 70-300. I love using it for motorsport, and I surprised myself when I enjoyed using it for some candids at a recent event in Liverpool.

My problem is that I am never 100% happy with the results from the lens. The images are never quite sharp enough, and the f5.6 at 300mm is limiting sometimes.

So ideally I would love a Sigma 120-300, but that isn't going to happen for a looong time :lol:

My thoughts are that I could go for either a Sigma 70-200 f2.8, or a Nikon 80-200 f2.8 (70-200VR is too much), and add a TC of some sort to get closer to 300mm. Does anyone have any opinions or experience with these lenses? What about coupled with a 1.4TC? I've read that 2xTC results aren't always brilliant, so I'm ignoring that option at the moment (unless I hear otherwise).

I also have ZERO knowledge of Teleconverters, so any advice in this area would be very useful. I would like the TC to be as versatile as possible, so that I can use it with any lenses I might get in the future.

Thanks for your help :)

PS just previewed this post - appologies for the essay!
 
You've two options with T/converters. Buy one that's generic or get one that is specifically matched to the lens you're combining it with. The latter being by far the better choice. Only problem with that is it may not fit on all your lenses. :(

With ANY teleconverter you must bear in mind one simple fact. It does nothing more than magnify (by the amount of it's stated factor) the central part of the lens you're using.

What that means, in essence, you magnify all the faults and aberrations of the original lens. Imagine what 2 converters do stacked together.... ;)

Guess the best thing for you is an expensive generic one - steer well clear of cheap ones if it's quality you're after!
 
I have a Nikon 80-200 AF-D and it has to be my favourite lens right now...

These were taken with it on my D2x http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=26185

I think your limited to only a couple of TC's that will work with the lens as it needs the screw drive etc in it to work as it uses the cameras internal focusing motor.

I've just ordered a Sigma 300/2.8 as well for motorsport use so I can retain the speed but get the longer length as well. But I'd recommend the Nikon.
 
Just bought myself the Sigma 70-200 (not used any converters yet) and it's awesome. Better than the Nikon 70-300 VR (which I also have).
 
Thanks guys. I am pretty much decided on either the 70-200 Sigma or the 80-200 Nikon. There are quite a few different versions of the Nikon aren't there? I know I definately don't want a push-pull zoom, so which versions does that leave me with?

I did also consider the 100-300 f4 Sigma, but that wouldn't give me any f2.8 :(

I sort of knew that the TCs can only be used with particular lenses - how do I find out which TCs can go with which lenses though? Is there anything else I should be wary of?
 
I use the Nikon 80-200mm AF-S and it is as sharp as a tack, fast focussing, built like a tank and can't fault it. In saying that I might be selling it soon as I intend to get the VR version which I need for low light jobs, the AF-S is basically the same lens without VR.
 
Hey Hacker, I read about your lens when I did a search on here - you got a good deal from the States IIRC. The AFS version is like hens teeth is it not - they discontinued it when the VR version was introduced , and left the AFD as an alternative.

Please let me know if you decide to upgrade :)
 
I have the 80-200 f2.8 af-d nikon(two touch) and sometimes use it with a 2x kenko pro dg converter, and I thought that it was doing fine, I had no complaints until I tried the sigma 70-200 f2.8 and I have now realised just how painful the afd nikon is when it comes to speed of focus....I would opt for the sigma anyday, or the nikon af-s.
 
Hacker said:
I use the Nikon 80-200mm AF-S and it is as sharp as a tack, fast focussing, built like a tank and can't fault it. In saying that I might be selling it soon as I intend to get the VR version which I need for low light jobs, the AF-S is basically the same lens without VR.
Click to expand...

I've been thinking of upgrading my AF-D to an AFS version so will look out for that appearing in the classifieds :D
 
paulc said:
I have the 80-200 f2.8 af-d nikon(two touch) and sometimes use it with a 2x kenko pro dg converter, and I thought that it was doing fine, I had no complaints until I tried the sigma 70-200 f2.8 and I have now realised just how painful the afd nikon is when it comes to speed of focus....I would opt for the sigma anyday, or the nikon af-s.
Click to expand...

It depends on which camera it's on. My D2x will focus much quicker than my previous D70 or D200 bodies would.
 
paulc said:
I have the 80-200 f2.8 af-d nikon(two touch) and sometimes use it with a 2x kenko pro dg converter, and I thought that it was doing fine, I had no complaints until I tried the sigma 70-200 f2.8 and I have now realised just how painful the afd nikon is when it comes to speed of focus....I would opt for the sigma anyday, or the nikon af-s.
Click to expand...

Is the Sigma a HSM lens? That would be a major boon over the AFD, and could just sway my decision if I cant find an AFS!
 
icecavern said:
It depends on which camera it's on. My D2x will focus much quicker than my previous D70 or D200 bodies would.
Click to expand...

I use it on a d70 and a fuji s2 pro , it seems ok but the sigma works fast as lightning and it is sharper, although I have only tried my friends sigma and I reckon af-s is the only way to go!...speaking from my own experience.
 
bulb763 said:
Please let me know if you decide to upgrade :)
Click to expand...

icecavern said:
I've been thinking of upgrading my AF-D to an AFS version so will look out for that appearing in the classifieds :D
Click to expand...

The AF-S will be in the classifieds in the next couple of days once I have time to take pics of it, I've just ordered a replacement at a Very Reasonable :D price which will hopefully be here beginning of next week.
 
The Sigma 70-200 2.8 is a cracking lens for the price IMO. A tad on the heavy side though.
 
Red Neck Man said:
The Sigma 70-200 2.8 is a cracking lens for the price IMO. A tad on the heavy side though.
Click to expand...
Agreed, I've just been looking through some of the shots I've taken with mine tonight and it's definitely sharper than the Canon version. Cracking lens.
 
Why not consider primes?

Admittedly i have no idea about nikon gear, but primes are faster and sharper then zooms, i am well impressed with mine (canon tho) and havent yet regretted having primes over the zoom.
 
russdaz said:
Why not consider primes?

Admittedly i have no idea about nikon gear, but primes are faster and sharper then zooms, i am well impressed with mine (canon tho) and havent yet regretted having primes over the zoom.
Click to expand...

Hadn't considered primes at all, but then I want the versatility to use this for things other than motorsport, such as portraits/candids.

The Sigma is looking like a real winner. There seem to be a lot of people with QC issues though - front-focusing seems a common occurance. I appreciate that you never hear of the good ones, but there quite a lot of people with these sorts of complaints. I guess it's something extra to consider if I go down the second-hand route...
 
bulb763 said:
There seem to be a lot of people with QC issues though - front-focusing seems a common occurance.
Click to expand...

To be honest there isn't a manufacturer without occasional QC issues. I might just be lucky but I've never had a problem with focus accuracy on any lens and there have been way too many of them.

My own issue with the sigma was/is the quality of the coating. It's with sigma just now for a couple of other things to be fixed though and they're going to clean it internally, replace the aperture control thing and replace the outer barrel. According to their webby that should be about £170 but they've given me a quote of £70, bargain. It's seriously making me think of getting rid of the Canon F2.8 IS (even though I just got it :| ), I like the sigma that much.
 
I had a Sigma 70-200 and it worked very well with the matched EX 1.4x converter. Swapped it for a Canon to get IS and reckon they are pretty much neck and neck optically. Very fast focus too...
 
Thanks again guys. Has anyone used the Sigma on a D50? I seem to recall from my late-night internet trawling last night that there can be issues with some aspects of the lens performance due to it being reverse-engineered.

Same question applies for the D200 (which I also plan on getting soonish).
 
I suppose you could say that (reverse engineered) of any Sigma/ Camera (except their own) combination.... :(
 
bulb763 said:
Thanks again guys. Has anyone used the Sigma on a D50? I seem to recall from my late-night internet trawling last night that there can be issues with some aspects of the lens performance due to it being reverse-engineered.

Same question applies for the D200 (which I also plan on getting soonish).
Click to expand...

I've remembered now - I read that due to its reverse engineering approach, it can't be guaranteed that it will work with subsequent bodies. I read of people having issues with the D200, and because this is next on my upgrade path, it's something else that needs to be considered. Anybody use this combo?
 
bulb763 said:
I've remembered now - I read that due to its reverse engineering approach, it can't be guaranteed that it will work with subsequent bodies. I read of people having issues with the D200, and because this is next on my upgrade path, it's something else that needs to be considered. Anybody use this combo?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't think you would have a problem. If you are that worried pop into town and see if Jessops has one which you can play around with.

King.
 
bulb763 said:
Hadn't considered primes at all, but then I want the versatility to use this for things other than motorsport, such as portraits/candids.

The Sigma is looking like a real winner. There seem to be a lot of people with QC issues though - front-focusing seems a common occurance. I appreciate that you never hear of the good ones, but there quite a lot of people with these sorts of complaints. I guess it's something extra to consider if I go down the second-hand route...
Click to expand...

i was worried about the primes at first to hense i got the 70-200mm too first, although it gets far less use now, i dont know what options you would have in getting a good lens in that range and then upgrade to 300mm prime. 300 and 400mm primes a rather popular in the pro togs for motorsport.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top