Quantcast
Which 70-200 - Beyond.ca - Car Forums
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Which 70-200

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Cowtown
    My Ride
    10' 4Runner SR5
    Posts
    6,362
    Rep Power
    59

    Default Which 70-200

    So I got rid of my 50mm ART because I want something more versatile for landscape. I knew at some point I'd have seller's remorse about Zeiss 100 Makro Planar and here it is.

    The 24-70 is arguably more "usable" for a landscape user but there are plenty of times I do like reach to frame things properly, and kind of take mountain portraits. A 70-200 could also double as an ok wildlife and occasional portrait lens (why I want 2.8 and not 4). The reality is I can only afford a 24-70 or 70-200 so I think I've decided the latter zoom range will get more use.

    Now that all that jargon is out of the way, it's pretty dizzying looking at all the options - 3 from Nikon alone. After skimming a bit, the Tamron G2 70-200 2.8 seems like a great option and appears to be slightly on-sale. But as a lens I'd realistically like to keep for awhile, is Tamron reliability as good as the latest Nikon stuff? I remember focus breathing was an issue, 200mm wasn't actually 200mm at all, etc.

    I also have a $100 gift-card for Vistek so I'll probably have to go there unless used

    Thoughts or advice?
    Ultracrepidarian

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,406
    Rep Power
    35

    Default

    First of all $100 is not worth shopping at Vistek in my opinion. If there are ANY issues, even 2 minutes after you buy it, you are completely SOL since they have no actual return policy if you've opened or touched the item, and defective items are returnable only at their discretion (I can only imagine what fighting with them over AF issues or a minor lens decentering would be like). On an expensive lens I would not take that gamble for $100 but it's up to you. Save it for a camera bag or something I had to fight with them to return a $20 camera case that had never been used, I don't even want to know what returning a $2K lens is like.

    As for the 70-200's, It kind of depends how much you want to spend. First you have the most expensive Nikon 70-200E FL, objective testing has shown it is so far ahead of anything else that it is entirely in a class of it's own. That version also has the 200mm MFD magnification "issue" resolved and has a positive magnification change such that it maintains almost all 200mm at MFD.

    The Tamron 70-200G2 is roughly in line with the older Nikon 70-200/2.8G VR II sharpness-wise, but with slower focus and it's not built quite as well. It is beaten by the Nikon 70-200E FL in all areas. The Tamron at 200mm MFD is a little tighter than the Nikon 70-200/2.8G VR II but not nearly as tight as the Nikon 70-200E FL which is the closest to 200mm of any 70-200 on the market at 200mm/MFD.

    Basically if you can afford it, the 70-200E FL is a no-brainer. No other 70-200 can match it in sharpness, focus speed, or MFD magnification. It is extremely expensive, but I have already seen it $500 off 3 times this year which helps a ton with the value proposition. At $500 off I think it is the one to buy if you're in the market.

    If you don't want to spend ~$3200, then it is between the Tamron 70-200 G2 and a used Nikon 70-200G VR II which go for roughly the same price, the Nikon being a bit more still. In this case I would go with the Nikon, it's just a bit better lens with no third party compatibility issues to ever worry about either with bodies or TCs. The MFD magnification issue on the Nikon is really only at absolute MFD of about 5ft. Even slightly off MFD it improves quickly. I owned that lens from 2009 to 2016/17 and in practice I was never really bothered by it, it's a much bigger issue on paper. If you do a ton of you shooting right at MFD though then it might be an issue for you, but every 70-200 has that issue to some degree except for the FL version which pretty well eliminates it.

    Also just a note about focus breathing - a 70-200mm lens @ 200mm and MFD designed to have zero focus breathing would require it's focal length drop to about 160mm. The only lenses designed with zero focus breathing are mostly cinema lenses. The magnification change people often desire in order to maintain 200mm at MFD means the lens actually has to be designed to exhibit positive focus breathing which is in the opposite direction. So, you actually want the lens to 'breathe' if you want 200mm at MFD, just in the other direction

    Rumor has it Sigma is working on a new 70-200/2.8 ART/Sport and might announce this September at Photokina. That has a potential to be a pretty good lens too.

    And finally if you don't need F2.8 you can save a ton of weight and money with a 70-200/4G which is about as sharp as the 70-200/2.8 VR II and is much better at 200mm MFD.

    Here is a 200mm MFD comparison of the lenses you're looking at:

    Last edited by Mitsu3000gt; 08-27-2018 at 03:35 PM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Cowtown
    My Ride
    10' 4Runner SR5
    Posts
    6,362
    Rep Power
    59

    Default



    Did not know about the Sigma, maybe I'll just wait and see what the verdict is.

    $3200 for a 70-200 seems crazy for a non-prof. Definitely is the best though!
    Ultracrepidarian

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,406
    Rep Power
    35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by msommers View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote


    Did not know about the Sigma, maybe I'll just wait and see what the verdict is.

    $3200 for a 70-200 seems crazy for a non-prof. Definitely is the best though!
    The Sigma has been rumored for a while now alongside a 70-200/4 Contemporary. If you can wait at least until Photokina, I would, but they have been putting that one off for a while now.

    Yeah the new lens premium plus ~1.3 exchange rate means some previously barely 'affordable' lenses are getting into exotic pricing territory. I imagine it will hold it's value extremely well though. I sold my ~7 year old 70-200 VR II for about $200-300 less than I paid for it in 2009.

    I was at TCS today and the guy helping me was able to check their system and told me the 500/5.6 PF will be $4699 CAD. A relative bargain, I am sure, but man some of these lenses are just getting ridiculous expensive.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    Fiesta ST
    Posts
    2,942
    Rep Power
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by msommers View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote


    Did not know about the Sigma, maybe I'll just wait and see what the verdict is.

    $3200 for a 70-200 seems crazy for a non-prof. Definitely is the best though!
    There was one in the Amazon Warehouse Deals for $2200 a month or so ago. I was too afraid of getting a 70-200 FL box with a 55-200mm non-VR in it

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Cowtown
    My Ride
    10' 4Runner SR5
    Posts
    6,362
    Rep Power
    59

    Default

    Lol yeah that was a shitshow hey.

    How do you know when those become available? Maybe I could rent the FL and G2 with my Vistek gift card!
    Ultracrepidarian

Similar Threads

  1. Canon FD 80-200 F4L or Panasonic 45-200?

    By Sykes in forum Photographer's Corner
    Replies: 5
    Latest Threads: 04-30-2012, 12:13 PM
  2. 70-200 f/4 IS vs 70-200 f/2.8

    By DJ Lazy in forum Photographer's Corner
    Replies: 12
    Latest Threads: 06-18-2007, 10:19 PM
  3. Which cars to mod, and which not to mod?

    By jumperman8 in forum General Car/Bike Talk
    Replies: 50
    Latest Threads: 12-08-2003, 09:15 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •