70-200mm f2.8 Shootout for Nikon? Which one...

[Vic Ives]

I am pretty sure this has probably been discussed before so if you guys can send me in the right direction that would be much appreciated.

If not, which one do you prefer? Between Tamron G2, Sigma Sport and Nikkor FL which is best? And why...?

Will be using it on the D850 and Z6.

Thank you in advance.

 

[Thern]

Roger Cicala did a comparison.

Just the MTF Charts: 70-200mm f2.8 Zoom Lenses

Well, I've avoided putting up the zoom lenses as long as I could, but here we are. I'm going to do things a little differently; rather than listing by brand I'm going to try listing by range and type. I'm suspicious of it because it's going to bring out the Brand Zealots who for some [...]

www.lensrentals.com

and a review on the G2

MTF Lens Tests of the New Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 SP Di VC USD G2

There's been a bit of rumbling lately about the new Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 G2 zoom. Not just because it is a frontrunner in the 2017 Most Initials in the Name Award, but because a lot of people are saying it's really quite good. The previous Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 was a good lens, but since they...

www.lensrentals.com

In Summary his findings are:
the Nikon 70-200E is the benchmark but the G2 is a very good second place when budget is a bit restricted

Got to say the E is absolutely stunning and if the G2 is as good as Roger states it’s even better than the older Nikon VRII (optically on par, but no mention of the heavy focusbreathing)

 

[Woodpecker]

You might find this useful as well ...

Nasim Mansurov is doing different kind of review compared with @Steve but here you can find reviews to many of the lenses in this range. I know he hasn't got all the latest ones in there but it may be still worthwhile to take a look.
I am "out of range" for you as I am using the Nikon 70-200 f4G and you are looking for f2.8.
However, the following aspects seem to be interesting from my perspective.

• I know may people out there don't care about it, but I always prefered to have lens correction done in the camera right away and that is something that doesn't work with 3rd party lenses.
• I am not into portraiture or anything like that but I know that people working in portraiture and event photography are quite picky sometimes about AF accuracy. I know some pro's even do AF fine tuning for fast 85 or 105mm lenses. From this perspective and depending on what you do the third party lenses could have a benefit, because with the USB dock you can put correct the lens at multiple focal length, something that has never worked for Nikon zooms. I myself had a Nikon lens some time ago, that needed correction in opposite direction on the short and long end and when I had it right for 200mm the other end was useless - and vice versa.
• One thing I heard a number of people complainng about (as stated in the mentioned review) is that Nikon swapped the focus and zoom ring around.
• The 70-200 FL is the sharpest and fastest focussing 70-200 you will find - at least for F mount - and because it is so good it is to my knowledge the only 70-200 that provides reasonable results with TC's beyond 1.4.

If I did not have my small 70-200 already that I am happy with for what I do and I looked for getting one I would definitely go for the 70-200 FL.

For further information you might want to take a look at this thread here talking about the 70-200 FL and using it with TC's .

All the best with your decision ...

 

[Nick B.]

However, the following aspects seem to be interesting from my perspective.

• I know may people out there don't care about it, but I always prefered to have lens correction done in the camera right away and that is something that doesn't work with 3rd party lenses

I have a Tamron 100-400mm lens. When I import into LR Classic, I do get lens corrections applied. I am not sure what your concern is here.

• I am not into portraiture or anything like that but I know that people working in portraiture and event photography are quite picky sometimes about AF accuracy. I know some pro's even do AF fine tuning for fast 85 or 105mm lenses. From this perspective and depending on what you do the third party lenses could have a benefit, because with the USB dock you can put correct the lens at multiple focal length, something that has never worked for Nikon zooms. I myself had a Nikon lens some time ago, that needed correction in opposite direction on the short and long end and when I had it right for 200mm the other end was useless - and vice versa.
• One thing I heard a number of people complainng about (as stated in the mentioned review) is that Nikon swapped the focus and zoom ring around.

With the 70-200 E (or FL), the zoom ring is furthest from the camera. Nikon has used this arrangement on several well known and modern lenses, including the 'S' version of the 70-200mm f/2.8. It is different from the previous version of the 70-200 F/2.8. This seems like one of the things that you adapt to quite quickly.

 

[Warren D]

I've only used Nikon 70-200 f2.8's from the first VR thru to the EFL. The EFL is by far the sharpest and I hardly notice any difference in IQ when using a 1.4 TC and just a very slight loss of IQ when using a 1.7TC. It works fine on all my Nikon bodies whereas the aftermarket lenses sometimes need updates. My sharpest lens was a Sigma 150 f2.8 macro until the 70-200 EFL came along but outside of sharpness, the Sigma is a bit of a dog, never wants to lock AF and has been back to Sigma several times for repairs. When I asked Sigma why I was having so many issues the response I got from them was that it was because it was for a Nikon. They have apparently had issues getting the mechanical aperture linkage to play well with their lens design. Pretty much ended Sigma as an option for me.

 

[Steve W]

+1 for the 70-200 f/2.8 FL. Takes a TC well and is lighter than the Sigma sport. If I’m travelling light I take the 70-200 f/4.

 

[fcotterill]

As with their infamous 3 Dragons [14-24, 24-70, 70-200] Nikon has pioneered the cutting edge qualities of the medium telephoto zoom since the late 1970s. The 80-200 f4AIS (1981-1988) blazed the trail as it set a new standard in IQ on film; more than anything, this lens changed the mindset among Pros on the status of zooms. Back then, it was unaffordable for most of us, students especially This MF classic is still rated as a top choice on the Nikon Df for good reasons. Nikon have bettered them ever since; first speeding the AIS up to f2.8, but especially as one of the focal Nikkors used to advance AF, VR etc. Many copies of these earlier AF models (notably 80-200 AfD) are still seeing active service on the front line 3 decades later. These things are built like tanks.

I've yet to handle the new S model but compared against prevailing build qualities the E FL is a stocky, very well built pro lens. My muscle memory also learnt its Fn controls for AF-ON+AF Mode on a D850.... Here's a Nikkor you can rely out there in extreme climes. It has to be so, when you consider the numbers out there earning $$$. [see the conservative sales on Roland's Nikon pages] The message here is the current fast FL and Z versions represent the significant investment over 4 decades of intensive R&D, not only in the optics but the quality.

As the 3rd party and OEM versions are all excellent optically, the differences across the brands hinge on focus speed, reliability and TCs. Since the expansion of the Z system over the past couple of months, the emerging consensus is the Z does better with TCs, and is far better that the F-mount combo with its TC2-Z. However, while I'm steer clear from using TC2 III on my copy of the FL, I have A0 prints taken with the FL @280mm (TC14 III) that speak more than any MTF. The rule is not to take liberties with subject distances. To try summarize this ramble, I'm keeping the E FL and saving for other lenses.

 

[fcotterill]

All the latest tests struggle to parse the competing models. The current Dec issue of the UK N-Photo Mag exemplifies this To whittle down these kinds of questions/choices over optics, I rely on Thom Hogan's reviews/pages, also PL's. The dedicated lens pages on Fred Miranda are as useful for real-world examples.

Final words: "...Let me put it another way: at present the only three primes I know of that perform better than the 70-200mm f/2.8E at the same focal length are the 200mm f/2, the recent Nikkor 105mm f/1.4E, and the 85mm f/1.4 Zeiss Otus. That’s saying a lot."
http://www.dslrbodies.com/lenses/ni...m-lens-reviews/nikon-70-200mm-f28e-fl-ed.html

 

[Thern]

Final words: "...Let me put it another way: at present the only three primes I know of that perform better than the 70-200mm f/2.8E at the same focal length are the 200mm f/2, the recent Nikkor 105mm f/1.4E, and the 85mm f/1.4 Zeiss Otus. That’s saying a lot."

A nice contribution for the hyperbole.
Despite the FLE is a stunning lens (like I said before) it’s costing more than double the price of the Tamron G2
So when budget doesn’t allow for it the G2 is certainly a very good
alternatieve, it’s on par with the VRII even better in the corners and there’s no heavy focusbreathing either.
LOL not so long ago the Internet was filled with people raving about that VRII it was called magical with TCs and its optical quality was defended with heart and soul against those trolls telling about that neglectible (really?) focusbreathing....
Again the FLE is the best proposition at this moment for F-mount, handsdown! but let’s put it in perspective, it’s somewhat better not like more than two times better in any regard.
If you’re pockets are deep enough buy one, if they are not or if you’re not willing to pay the premium for ‘a bit more’ buy a Tamron G2 or Sigma Sport or Nikon VRII.
LOL Even a VRI is still no slough (for a cropsensor that is)

 

[fcotterill]

As always, it's an entirely personal matter what one chooses to spend. And let the keyboarders agonize over trivial differences in MTFs, corner sharpness etc. (as for trolling about focus-breathing this a dead corpse best left to fester in some toxic forum thread in dpr).
As trip costs are always higher, massing over the longer term... within the means and reason, I've learnt to pay more for reliability. As importantly, already been said above, the E FL wins yet again with its far better IQ with a TC.
Also consider if the price includes Fn buttons on the lens (all Nikkor f2.8's and also Sigma's). This additional custom control for an AFmode is very useful for action (wildlife, sport). (A pity the 300 PF and 80-400 have no Fn buttons, neither an AF memory option).
OEM lenses also avoid future firmware hassles - Z AF especially is a possible risk in this respect IF we see 3rd party AF lenses for Z mount. Depending on where/who one is, an OEM lens can also be backed up with an emergency unit from Nikon service
Redundancy of one's system is essential in the field. If the 300 PF breaks, I have a high performing 100-280 f4 even if it's 2x the weight

 

[Vic Ives]

Geez... Thanks guys. Thanks!! There's some really interesting thoughts above and a lot to consider. I guess you cant really go wrong with any of them. I think I will see how far I can stretch the inside of my pocket. Might possibly be living in the bush in Zambia so would like to have the gear as reliable as possible as well.

 

[EricBowles]

Since we're being really helpful, the Z 70-200 f/2.8 S is absolutely outstanding on the Z cameras. AF performance of the Z6 with Z 70-200 seems more accurate and faster. So the result is I don't need the 70-200 for my D850 shooting with two cameras.

Realistically, I think the E F-mount version is the one you should use for your planned use - but it's something to consider.

 

[flyguy]

After owning several Tamron lenses (18-270 DX, 24-70 G2 and 150-600 first generation), I am done with third party lenses for my Nikon DSLR bodies. All three Tamrons were soft compared to comparable Nikkor glass. I grew tired of my 150-600 Tamron hunting for focus even under the best lighting conditions; also, when I checked shots on my computer monitor I got no more than half in acceptable focus. There were times when I thought I had the subject locked on with the 150-600 and had a solid rest, and still blew the shot!!! The 24-70 Tamron G2 weighs more than my Nikkor 24-70 and it requires a filter greater than 77mm. Grrrrrrrrrrrr...........!!!!!!!!!!!!! When I tested the Tamron 24-70 G2 on my D850, I got better results with my 28mm and 50mm manual focus Nikkor primes from my film days. That lens went back to B&H a week later. I have the current iteration Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8; it is my sharpest lens and has the fastest auto focus acquisition and lock on of any AF lens I personally have ever used. I like the fact that most Nikkor pro series lenses use the same 77mm filters. Worst case, for my old manual focus primes I have a step up ring, 52mm to 77mm when I want to use an ND filter. Have shot video with the Nikkor 70-200 as well, shot on both my D7100 and D850; it delivers for me. Nikon made the DSLR bodies; they should know how to make the glass for those bodies, In fact, except for my ND filters, all my clear protective filters and my CPLs are also Nikon brand.

 

[dabhand16]

I am pretty sure this has probably been discussed before so if you guys can send me in the right direction that would be much appreciated.

If not, which one do you prefer? Between Tamron G2, Sigma Sport and Nikkor FL which is best? And why...?

Will be using it on the D850 and Z6.

Thank you in advance.

I can only speak on the Sigma 150-600. When I was researching it came down to the Sigma 150-600 Sport or the #Tamron 150-600G2. I have no doubt that either would have given great results. I spent a lot of time looking in the photography forums and reading reviews and was drawn to the Sigma. Can't really pinpoint why. anyway, I got the Sigma and hve bee very pleased with it.
I know a wildlife photographer who, after testing out the Tamron 150-600 G2 sold his Nikon 500mm f4!!!! He says that on pixel peeping the Nikon is better (you would hope for that, wouldn't you?) but in the real world the IQ was really good - and he has around 7k in the bank too! He was also lent the top Olympus MFT kit (by Olympus) for about 3 months. From memory an OM D E-M1mk2, 300mm f2.8, 2x TC, 60mm macro. When Olympus eventually prised it back from him, he bought the exact same kit! He has great pleasure showing hi hand-held 60mm shots which are awesome.
He has not given up on his Nikons. He has Nikon in his blood, but he always takes the Oly kit around as it is so light and will often only take it if it will do what he wants to do and he will be walking for a long time or accessing difficult areas.