 |
Just bought 7 used for the firstime atamron 17-50mm f/2.8 really pleased with the quality, not getting the purple fringing either whic a few reviews have quoted.
Have a few other Tamron lenses & pleased with all of them so far.
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
always stay w/ the brand name. You will wish you did and then purchase it with in a year of buying the off brand. Just my experience. The first time a few shots look "soft" you will say "I should of bought the Nikon lens."
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
If you want nothing but the best, I think you already know the answer to your own question.
Price or performance: pick one. :)
Todd | www.ishootshows.com
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
hah yea. but idk maybe i was just thinkinh the tamron is allmost as good as the nikon..? well thats what i was hoping for. yea. i think im might just go w the nikon.
todd.. any wide angle advice?
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Hey Aaraam,
In any given comparison between an established brand-name lens like the Nikon and a third-party option, there's always a case of diminishing returns.
In most instances, the OEM lens is going to offer "better" performance, but the degree of the increase may be marginal in light of the premium you're paying for it and the brand name.
Or in other words: Just because the Nikon is twice the price doesn't mean it's twice as good, twice as sharp, etc.
That said, I'd still go for the Nikon. Aside from any differences in image quality, you get vibration reduction (VR/IS) and a tool that will hold it's value much better should you ever need to sell.
As for wide angle options, the ultra-wide 14-24mm f/2.8 is simply excellent. I would not recommend the 12-24mm f/4 lenses for concert photography.
Todd | www.ishootshows.com
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Get the Nikon. It's best-in-class when compared to all of the other brands including Canon. It's hands down one of the nicer lenses Nikon makes (both build-wise and optically).
The VR will come in handy in lots of situations as well.
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
I bought a Sigma 70-200mm a while ago due to its decent reviews, but will be switching up to a Nikon as soon as I can afford it. Sigma has poor AF performance which is the biggest downfall. I often have to manually focus if I want it right. When I used the Nikon for a short while I never had a problem.
If it's financially choice, go with the Nikkor!
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Get the Nikon lens
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Another reason to purchase the Nikon is the market for used lenses is much better with brand names as oppose to third party makers, if you decide to ever upgrade your lens.
If you can, rent out both lenses for a day. If not, maybe bring your camera to a reputable camera store and test out the lenses on your camera.
Alternatively, try to find a camera store with a good return policy, most likely with a 7 or 14 day return policy.
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
I rented a Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8 this afternoon to shoot The Dresden Dolls on Sunday. But, Good Lord, it's heavy. That on the D3 is going to be a challenge on my wrist in the pit.
Posted 2 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
Would you like to comment?
Sign up for a free account, or sign in (if you're already a member).
|
Concert Photography /
Discuss
Feed – Subscribe to Concert Photography discussion threads
Flickr Blog |
About Flickr |
Terms of Use |
Your Privacy |
Copyright/IP Policy | Report Abuse
|
Deutsch
|
English
|
Español
|
Français
|
|
Italiano
|
Português
Copyright © 2008 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Save to del.icio.us