Nikon D750 & D780

Good to see one more Tammy 70-200 2.8 owner [emoji4]
 
According to TP D750 grapevine, David might be selling his [emoji12]. No VRII, but 70-200 2.8 nonetheless [emoji1] and doesn't breathe crazy
 
anibap said:
According to TP D750 grapevine, David might be selling his [emoji12]. No VRII, but 70-200 2.8 nonetheless [emoji1] and doesn't breathe crazy
Click to expand...
Not once when have I shot with mine have I thought "oh that doesn't seem to be giving me as much reach as I thought" :p ;)
 
snerkler said:
Not once when have I shot with mine have I thought "oh that doesn't seem to be giving me as much reach as I thought" :p ;)
Click to expand...

You won't know unless you use another that doesn't breathe. I had the Nikon 70-200 F4 and the Tammy 70-200 2.8 at the same time and the difference was quite obvious. The F4 filled the frame more from same distance.

If you are using only one lens you adjust your shooting accordingly as I also do now. Well, I am talking about portraits at CFD not stuff like motorsports or landscape where breathing is not an issue.

The Canon and Nikon VR(I?) can be used for close headshots without cropping much, but with the Tamron and Nikon VRII, you have to crop more to get the same view. Needless to say the compression will be also bit different.

If you don't notice and are happy with that, that is fine, but doesn't mean the issue is not there. It is quite well documented [emoji4]
 
anibap said:
You won't know unless you use another that doesn't breathe. I had the Nikon 70-200 F4 and the Tammy 70-200 2.8 at the same time and the difference was quite obvious. The F4 filled the frame more from same distance.

If you are using only one lens you adjust your shooting accordingly as I also do now. Well, I am talking about portraits at CFD not stuff like motorsports or landscape where breathing is not an issue.

The Canon and Nikon VR(I?) can be used for close headshots without cropping much, but with the Tamron and Nikon VRII, you have to crop more to get the same view. Needless to say the compression will be also bit different.

If you don't notice and are happy with that, that is fine, but doesn't mean the issue is not there. It is quite well documented [emoji4]
Click to expand...
Yes it was tongue in cheek, (with a bit of seriousness) :p I know it breathes, as you say it's been well documented. But as you also say if you have nothing to compare it to you'll never know, and as such I think people can get too hung up on these things. If I'd never been on TP I've have never been any the wiser. Of course YMMV ;)
 
snerkler said:
Yes it was tongue in cheek, (with a bit of seriousness) :p I know it breathes, as you say it's been well documented. But as you also say if you have nothing to compare it to you'll never know, and as such I think people can get too hung up on these things. If I'd never been on TP I've have never been any the wiser. Of course YMMV ;)
Click to expand...
I don't worry about the breathing on the Tamron. I guess we just use and get the best out of what we have.
I was only talking about a technical point. The Nikon VRII is a brilliant lens and one of the top lenses in that category.
 
I have the sigma 70-200 which I love on my D7200, hoping there are no issues when I upgrade to the D750.

Doesn't get used much but when I do it's a work horse of a lens.
 
dan_yorkshire said:
I have the sigma 70-200 which I love on my D7200, hoping there are no issues when I upgrade to the D750.

Doesn't get used much but when I do it's a work horse of a lens.
Click to expand...
Don't read some of my previous posts then :exit:
 
snerkler said:
Don't read some of my previous posts then :exit:
Click to expand...

Go on save me a search on the phone app, did it not fair well?

Mine is the original non OS version and is nice and sharp. Appreciate it might not be up there with the Nikon version but that's a whole lot more of expense
 
dan_yorkshire said:
Go on save me a search on the phone app, did it not fair well?

Mine is the original non OS version and is nice and sharp. Appreciate it might not be up there with the Nikon version but that's a whole lot more of expense
Click to expand...
My camera doesn't play nice with Sigmas. Tried both the old non OS and new OS version and both massively front focused and fine tune doesn't work properly with them in the at +20 it only moved focus a small bit. Had a similar issue with a couple of Sigma 85mm's too. Reading around it does appear that the odd Nikon doesn't play nice with 3rd party lenses for some reason, but I'm sure yours will be fine.

I do have a Tamron lens that works fine with it though, although I'm still sending my camera in next week to have the AF module checked.
 
Missed a couple of these last week and now typically when I have the funds there aren't any for sale.....Prices seem to have gone up a little, grey market ones are over £1200
 
AndrewSt said:
Missed a couple of these last week and now typically when I have the funds there aren't any for sale.....Prices seem to have gone up a little, grey market ones are over £1200
Click to expand...

What, for a cat?:exit:
 
AndrewSt said:
Missed a couple of these last week and now typically when I have the funds there aren't any for sale.....Prices seem to have gone up a little, grey market ones are over £1200
Click to expand...

Tell me about it, was ready to purchase the D750 & 24-70 bundle last week, which is now up £170.

Still more value in the bundle than body only but think I'm gonna but after the wedding season is over and see how the prices have changed whilst looking out for 2nd hand in the meantime.
 
Does seem it's only import prices that have been affected at present, but boy have they gone up. £1277 body only from Panamoz, that's only £100 saving over Amazon. Not worth it imo.
 
snerkler said:
Does seem it's only import prices that have been affected at present, but boy have they gone up. £1277 body only from Panamoz, that's only £100 saving over Amazon. Not worth it imo.
Click to expand...
dan_yorkshire said:
Tell me about it, was ready to purchase the D750 & 24-70 bundle last week, which is now up £170.

Still more value in the bundle than body only but think I'm gonna but after the wedding season is over and see how the prices have changed whilst looking out for 2nd hand in the meantime.
Click to expand...

Would be the perfect time for a D760 to be announced....then the prices might fall.
 
AndrewSt said:
Would be the perfect time for a D760 to be announced....then the prices might fall.
Click to expand...
I was expecting a D810 replacement to be announced before the D750 replacement and we've not heard anything about that yet. D810 was announced in June that year I believe, with the D750 announced September but not available until November. I think with the quakes they've had over there everything has been delayed.
 
juggler said:
Ditto, and I'm surprised to find myself saying that. I didn't think I needed it and it was an impulse buy but I use it a lot.
Click to expand...

That's very interesting Simon. I guess I have craved the VR2 and have been caught out with 3rd party lenses in the past with QC issues. The better half missed the postie earlier so probably pick up in the morning now.

I didn't use my canon mk2 enough really and so this is a sensible buy for me. I certainly need one in the coming years for my little girl and am happy to bare the weight for the results that they provide.
 
Fingers crossed the weather's still looking good for Donnington on Sunday :) Not sure whether to take the 70-200mm or 150-600mm so will just take both :D
 
kellett said:
Can I ask which one you preferred looking for new lens in this range and unsure of which to go for?
Click to expand...
I bought the Nikon F4 after doing an enormous amount of reading on the internet and settled thinking I don't need 2.8, it is just a stop less light , and weighs half of the 2.8. The f4 is a cracking lens and all images I took with are excellent including close focus portraits. But I soon realised I only shot 40 frames with it in 1 year and decided to sell as I have the 85 1.8G for portraits.

It is at this time a friend asked me to buy the Tamron 2.8 VC for him as he was away and there was a good offer that time. I started using the lens and realised that the Tammy is a better lens for my needs as I love shallow dof portraits and good bokeh. I also used both in my daughter's ballet lessons and the 2.8 does help. The Tamron is heavier, but the result it produces is worth it. I don't take the Tammy everywhere and that is fine.

If I have to buy again and given a choice, I'd buy the 2.8 lens again even though it is heavy or more expensive. It works for me, but not sure if you have different needs. In my just over 6 months of ownership of the Tamron 2.8 , I have shot over 500 frames with it even though I don't take it with me everywhere.

Once you have a special lens like that, I guess you create opportunities to use it knowing the limitations.

Between Nikon and Tamron 2.8, I'd buy the Nikon in an ideal scenario, but for my current need, I find the Tamron tremendous value.

juggler said:
Ditto, and I'm surprised to find myself saying that. I didn't think I needed it and it was an impulse buy but I use it a lot.
Click to expand...
I use it a lot too and much to my surprise since I hardly used the Nikon 70-200 F4 while I had that lens.
 
Last edited:
@minnnt where were you stood for these shots as it looks as though you're in the infield but I know you said you were only stood in the standard places? Not sure how I'll get on with the Tammy as it struggled to focus when right up against a fence at YWP, even though I had the limiter on. Didn't have time to suss out why though, so hopefully I will this time.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/73723596@N08/26771448616/in/dateposted/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/73723596@N08/26658341142/in/dateposted/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/73723596@N08/26650731272/in/dateposted/
 
#1 was taken from the outside inbetween McLeans and Coppice. There's a banking you can get up for a little more height if needed.

#2 was on the inside of Redgate. If it wasn't absolutely p***ing it down i would have changed to a wider lens for some shots.

#3 was taken on the inside of Starkey's Straight heading towards The Esses/Goddards. There's a gap between the barrier and fencing that you can poke your head up if you're careful.

Not sure if you've had a play or even whether it makes a difference or not but can't you set the camera to ignore closer things when focusing? Could help.
 
anibap said:
I bought the Nikon F4 after doing an enormous amount of reading on the internet and settled thinking I don't need 2.8, it is just a stop less light , and weighs half of the 2.8. The f4 is a cracking lens and all images I took with are excellent including close focus portraits. But I soon realised I only shot 40 frames with it in 1 year and decided to sell as I have the 85 1.8G for portraits.

It is at this time a friend asked me to buy the Tamron 2.8 VC for him as he was away and there was a good offer that time. I started using the lens and realised that the Tammy is a better lens for my needs as I love shallow dof portraits and good bokeh. I also used both in my daughter's ballet lessons and the 2.8 does help. The Tamron is heavier, but the result it produces is worth it. I don't take the Tammy everywhere and that is fine.

If I have to buy again and given a choice, I'd buy the 2.8 lens again even though it is heavy or more expensive. It works for me, but not sure if you have different needs. In my just over 6 months of ownership of the Tamron 2.8 , I have shot over 500 frames with it even though I don't take it with me everywhere.

Once you have a special lens like that, I guess you create opportunities to use it knowing the limitations.

Between Nikon and Tamron 2.8, I'd buy the Nikon in an ideal scenario, but for my current need, I find the Tamron tremendous value.


I use it a lot too and much to my surprise since I hardly used the Nikon 70-200 F4 while I had that lens.
Click to expand...

Do you think you use more now that your kids are a little older? I had a similar route, started with the f4 canon lens, then realised I wanted the 2.8. I find 135 perfect for chasing kids around the park with or the odd football event etc. But tight shots of the kids are great too.

Have managed to pick mine up from the post office, had an issue early on with the AF not working but remedied somehow. Needed a bit of MA and now seems to be spot on. A weekend of putting it through its paces.
 
minnnt said:
#1 was taken from the outside inbetween McLeans and Coppice. There's a banking you can get up for a little more height if needed.

#2 was on the inside of Redgate. If it wasn't absolutely p***ing it down i would have changed to a wider lens for some shots.

#3 was taken on the inside of Starkey's Straight heading towards The Esses/Goddards. There's a gap between the barrier and fencing that you can poke your head up if you're careful.

Not sure if you've had a play or even whether it makes a difference or not but can't you set the camera to ignore closer things when focusing? Could help.
Click to expand...
Thanks for this, much appreciated. So you can get to the infield as general admission then?

The Tammy does have a focus limiter but didn't seem to help. As I said I didn't really have time to mess about as my wife was getting fed up waiting ;)
 
No, i mean in camera. I can't remember where it is in the menu but I'm pretty sure you can set it 1-5.

Yes, in-field is pretty much all functional now with the exception of a section opposite Starkey's Bridge i believe. There are two tunnels you can get through, one on the start/finish straight and one just before Coppice.
 
minnnt said:
No, i mean in camera. I can't remember where it is in the menu but I'm pretty sure you can set it 1-5..
Click to expand...

Menu a3 - Focus Tracking with lock on.

Can be set to Long (setting 5) or Short (setting 1 )
When using continuous af, adjusts the time the camera will ignore objects getting in the way.

At least I think that's what you mean?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top