User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  0
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Nikon 70 -200 F4 Experiance and performance?

  1. #1
    Member Steven Kemp's Avatar
    Join Date
    07 Jul 2013
    Location
    Chiswick
    Posts
    14
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Nikon 70 -200 F4 Experiance and performance?

    Folks,

    I have the dilemma of trying to select some good glass for my D7000. I’ve been a bit disappointed with some of the results achieved and concluded that much is to do with my technique but also due the budget lenses I’ve had for several years. Landscapes, architecture and portraits were generally fine but wildlife images sucked. Lack of reach, blurred images and poor contrast abound.

    I’ve been working on the technique and results have improved (a lot), but I still see issues that I suspect reflect the cheap glass I’m using.

    I’m tempted by the 70 – 200 F4 which seems to offer much of the quality of the 70 – 200 F2.8 but saves a $1000. I’m also tempted by the 300mm F4 with a 1.4 x tele.

    I’d appreciate your thoughts!

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    13 Apr 2010
    Location
    Goulburn
    Posts
    591
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    yep, sounds very familiar. I also have a D7000 and wanted to upgrade my 55-200 lens. In the end (let me tell you it took a lot of reading) I settled on the new tamron 70-200 f2.8 VC. To start with I was going to get the Sigma but then the Tamron was released and I was able to get a good deal through a Sydney based store (I have usually bought from DWI in the past which is based in Hong Kong). There are plenty of reviews that compare the Nikon f4, and the sigma and Tamron 2.8 as they are all very similar in price and I would say would be marketed at the sub-pro level (MY OPINION ONLY). The 50-150 should also be included too I believe.

    For me it came down to the extra f-stops. If I had a D800 that could do amazing things in low light then maybe I would have gone the f4 as I could have increased the ISO instead of dropping the aperture (hope that makes sense). But for me the ability to increase the aperture to f2.8 was the winning point. It just seemed to be the right balance.

    I need to add that I am no pro, and this is only from my knowledge. Others will, I am sure, offer a perspective from a professional or more experienced level.

    My tamron is due to arrive tomorrow, as soon as it does I am hoping to samples posted ASAP.

    cheers
    danny

Posting Permissions

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