f2.8 dx lenses

<p>Not long ago swopped my nikon 18-200 for a tamron 17-50 2.8, and was looking for a fast tele (approx 70-200)to pair with it (preferably with VR).</p>

<p>the only fast nikon i can find is the full frame 70-200, are there any fast dx tele's available? </p>

<p>No, those fast teles only come in FX - the DX teles are the consumer grade lenses (55-200, 55-300). The FX lenses do work perfectly on DX cameras, though. If you're looking for cheaper, check out the 70-300 options (Nikon 70-300 AF-S VR and Tamron 70-300 OS).</p>

<p>There are a few DX telephoto lenses, such as the 85mm/f3.5 DX macro lens and two tele zooms: 55-200 AF-S DX (2 vesions w/ and w/out VR) plus the recent 55-300mm AF-S VR DX.</p>

<p>Generally speaking, there is no point to make telephoto lenses DX since the front element will be just as big for FX and DX and you will not save anything to make them DX. If anything, I am a bit surprised that Nikon even bothers to add the 55-300 DX since there is already a very good 70-300mm AF-S VR that can cover FX, but I guess they need to respond to Canon's 55-250mm zoom.</p>

<p>I wouldn't expect any 70-200mm/f2.8 DX, but most likely Nikon will have an f4, FX version of that lens if you are looking for something smaller and lighter. This year Nikon has already introduced the 16-35mm/f4 AF-S Vr and 24-120mm/f4 AF-S VR; the only one missing is the long end.</p>

<p>Try the Sigma 50-150mm 2.8. Gets a lot of use by wedding photographers who seem to like it.</p>

<p>Speaking of the Sigma 50-150mm, f2.8, B&H is listing it as discontinued for the Canon, Nikon, Sony and Sigma mounts; it is only available for Pentax: <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=si5015028*&N=0&InitialSearch=yes">http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=si5015028*&N=0&InitialSearch=yes</a><br />Is Sigma coming out with any new version or they are just cutting it after merely 3 years? I haven't heard about any new version.</p>

<p>For those who might want the Sigma, please keep in mind that it is discontinued.</p>

<p>Technically, the only f2.8 DX zoom Nikon has is the 17-55mm/f2.8 AF-S DX, but there are a number of 3rd-party equivalents.</p>

<p>Also discontinued is the Tokina 50-135mm F2.8 AT-X Pro DX which is a marvelous companion to the Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S DX Lens, approximately equal in FOV to the classic 80-200 FX zooms but better quality. This is an excellent lens if you can find one. To respond to the OP, there seems to be a pattern here.</p>

<p>so that leaves 3 choices that i know of</p>

<ul>

<li>tamron 70-200 2.8, £610</li>

<li>sigma 70-200 2.8, £650</li>

<li>nikon 70-200 2.8 VR, £1600 new, approx £1000- 1300 used depending vr1 or vr2</li>

</ul>

<p>it seems strange that the 3rd party lenses do not offer VR at this focal length?<br>

Any other fast zoom-tele's that you would recommend?</p>

<p>will have a look at the tokina and sigma lenses - they are just the type of thing i was looking for - is either VC?</p>

<p>The Sigma 70-200 is just released with OS (their VR), and gets fairly good reviews as far as I read them. But the price got a serious bump up as well - the one you list is sure without OS. And there is still the Nikon AF-D 80-200 f/2.8. No VR either, lots cheaper, slower to AF and optically not far behind the newer 70-200VRs.</p>

<p>Sigma still lists the 50-150 f/2.8 on their website with pricing, but typically stores seem more up to date with discontinuance notices than marketing websites... so, given Shun's information, you may have to move fast. It's without VR, though.<br>

Another option would be faster primes, if the convenience of a zoom is not a must-have.</p>

<p>hmm, i have the sigma 50-150/2.8. it's actually very compact--about the size of the 70-300 VR--and looks like a tall can of beer. it takes great photos and has a very useful focal range on DX. there's no OS, which is a mixed blessing. on one hand, lack of a stabilizer makes the lens lighter--it's easily handheld--OTOH, you need a fast shutter past 150mm in low-light conditions. it does pair very well with the tamron 17-50.</p>

<p>i dont see it in nikon mount at amazon, so apparently it has been discontinued . you might be able to find a used copy on fleabay.</p>

<p>as far as the 70-200s, if you are shooting sports or action, i would avoid the tamron, which has slow AF due to its micromotor. the new sigma 70-200 w/ OS is $1700 new, which is more than the used price of a 70-200 VR I. but the nikon 80-200/2.8 can be had for much cheaper..</p><div></div>

<p>a quick ebay search indicates there are a few new copies of the 50-150 in nikon mount still out there. perhaps not for long, though...</p>

<p>Why not try the 85mm 1.4?? simply awesome on DX!!!</p>

<p>if i'm not mistaken, £400 = $600-$700 USD ($640 at current 1.6 exchange rate). that will not be enough for a used 85/1.4, which is about $1000 new and $925 used for the AF-D version. for comparison's sake, the 85/1.8 is £312 at Amazon.uk, which is within the OP's budget.</p>

oh, i didnt see anything detailing his budget.

i could be wrong, oh well, even still, save the cash , go for the gold, it will pay off in the long run.

<p>Shun, I think that, as you said, the 50-150 is discontinued. It made place for the II version. I've been fooled by a vendor. I just bought the non OS version. It's very good but I would have preferred the OS version.</p>

<p>If AF speed and weight isn't an issue, I strongly recommend the Nikon 80-200 2.8, in D or non-D versions. Some copies are better than others wide open, but if you get a good one it's almost as good as the Nikon 70-200, sans VR, as mentioned.<br>

If you need it for sports, the previous post about the 85 1.4 is the way to go. With a 1.4X TC in your pocket, that thing is magical.</p>

<p>richard, i have the 50-150 II. it does not have OS.</p>

<p>+1 for Sigma 50-150. Not great, but a nice little lens. Very light too, and quite cheap considering it's a 2.8 tele. It loses around a 1/2 to 1 stop of sharpness (aberration actually) in comparison to NK 80-200/2.8.</p>

<p>My Sigma 50-150 is extremely good at all focal lengths and f stops. I wish it was stabilized. I'm hoping Sigma is about to come out with a stabilized version, I'd sell mine and get one for sure.</p>

<p>I just ordered the Tokina 50-135. I was deciding between this and the optically excellent 80-200, but the latter lens is a bit long for me. Might pay to have a play with the lens to see if it is the right focal length for you.<br>

The 50-135 works out roughly the same length as the 70/80-200 on a full frame camera, which is perfect for me.</p>

<p>Are there two difference Sigma 50-150mm/f2.8, 1 and 2? I am not that familiar with Sigma lenses, but it looks like everything is now discontinued.</p>

<p>I would have guesses that something like a 50-135 or 150mm f2.8 would be great for DX-format users. A year or two ago some of us thought Nikon should introduce such a lens, but maybe they are not selling as well.</p>

<p>Is there any new replacement version of the 50-150mm? If so, it would be good to have a link.</p>

<p>Re the sigma 50-150, i was also wondering how many versions of the non-OS lens has been released?<br>

phoned my local camera shop and they have one for £400 new, a significant saving and less than half the price of the OS</p>

<p>I'm sorry if I confused a few of you guys... My mistake, at this time, there is no OS on the 50-150mm from Sigma. The version II I was referring to has the M/AF switch witch I taught it was the OS control.<br>

I own that lenses (the old one) and find it excellent for my needs (and my budget).</p>

 

<p>Shun, the main difference between 50-150 I and II is that the II, which I have, and am very satisfied with, has HSM (HyperSonicMotor). No OS (=VR in Sigma language)</p>

<p>Many might find the range 50-150 a bit peculiar. My photo shop guy told me that this range was intended from Sigma on DX to be the same popular range as 70-200 on FX.</p>