Tamron (Nikon) 70-200 vs Nikkor 80-200 f2.8

[ravenger]

Hi all. I'm currently interested in buying a good, afordable and wide aperture long range lens. But in dilemma between tamron 70-200 and nikon 80-200. Could anyone who have had the experience using these lens please share some views? I'm using D7000 body.

Thanks.

[dualcarb]

No dilema here...you can't go wrong with Nikon...I have not used the Tamron before, but I have a friend with the 80-200 f/2.8 and it is wonderfully sharp.

[ravenger]

Yeah I heard it too that the Nikkor 80-200 is sharp. Some reviews i read around also said the Tamron 70200 IQ is good, only that the AF is slow.

[peteloud]

This is just a repeat of my posting in thread a little further down.

I was very keen to have one of these Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 lenses for my Sony A850 until I read that a major photographic equipment rental company found that this was their most unreliable lens. I think 40% of them failed in their first year.

Do not get the impression that I am anti-Tamron, I am not. I have Tamron 28-75 F2.8 and am very happy with it. I am delaying until Tamron bring out a new 70-200mmm f2.8.

Here is a link to the rental company comments,
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2009...epair-data-3-5
A quote from this website says,
"The Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 is joining the Sigma 120-400 and 150-500 (45% failure rate) in the Lensrentals Hall of Shame: lenses we no longer carry because their failure rate is so high we just can’t afford them. Almost half of them have failed, usually after 3 to 6 months in service."

I am still considering buying the Tamron 70-200mm for my Sony A850, but in UK the lens comes with a 5 year warranty. I would not buy one without such a warranty.

[ravenger]

Seriously I would like some pictures taken by these two lens. Must not be bias and both use tripod/monopod as they dont have VC. huhu.

[tiffani3]

nikon should be a wiser choice

[fur.chang]

I read Tamron is coming out with a new 70-200 f/2.8 VC.

If you can wait, you may want to see how does this lens fair before making your decision.

[peteloud]

How reliable is your information about this new Tamron lens? I hope you are correct, but there are always lots of rumours and dreams about new products in the camera world :-(

Where, and what, did you read about it.

[daniel_lkk]

A constant f2.8 telephoto lens is nice to have but it's extremely impractical since it's quite hefty in weight and downright huge. You'd think twice carrying it for vacations. Don't get me wrong, all of Nikon's 70/80-200 are fantastic lenses. I personally own the 80-200 f4 Ais as well as the 80-200 f2.8 AFS and both are amazing even shot side open. If your aim is just for reach, then go for the 70-300. The only reason to go for the f2.8 is for separation and speed. If you're not going to utilize this, then you're better off without one. I've come across someone in Flickr who did a side by side comparison. You can try searching it yourself. Frankly, I can guarantee no one can tell the difference if each of the shots were shot by itself. Doing side by side comparison is just nitpicking. The Tamron holds itself pretty well in terms of picture quality but for peace of mind and reliability, I'd stick with the Nikon. Ultimately the choice is yours. If you can afford it, go for the Nikon. Look hard enough and you can probably find the push-pull version for under 2k. If not, then the Tamron is your only answer. Happy hunting

[unsight]

Frankly speaking, I am using the Tamron 70-200 for all my outdoor shoot and nikkor 24-70 for event. Heck thats the only two lens I have. Till today after testing with my friend 80-200 AF-s and 70-200 VRII, I still doesn't have any reason to upgrade to VR2 as the IQ is quite the same. And also never need to shoot with VR. I only do wedding. The only weakness to me is the hunting in low light. Reliability wise....it never let me down so far.

[loveshots]

DSC_4378_419_.jpgcrop.jpg

Seriously I would like some pictures taken by these two lens. Must not be bias and both use tripod/monopod as they dont have VC. huhu.

Nikkor 80-200mm f2.8 on a D300. 1/350S, f3.3. Level tweaked, no other editing. As with most lenses wide opened at f2.8 the IQ drops. Look at the 100% crop. But then again no one looks at an image at 100% every time. This is just to answer your question. It's a good lens.

[erictanst]

Get the Nikon version. Tamron 70-200 focusing motor sound will make you very frustrating over time and tends to hunt at low light.

[Gabriel Kuon]

Is the tamron really that TERRIBLE in focusing? I am stuck between the 1st version and the new VC version now. Currently just can't judge with the price tag of the new VC.

[realemo]

My comp's got a new Tamron VC version, solidly built, fast and accurate focusing and sharp...also comes with a cheap price tag...kinda worth it in my opinion..

[avvai]

I saw the thatnikonguys's youtube review on Tamron 70-200 VC . He gives kind of positive review. Especially if budget is a issue.

[khoking]

Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8 OS HSM should be better than the Nikon.

For such long lens, OS / VC / VR is a must (of course you can live without it, but why would you want to?).