Posts: 25,197
Threads: 9,431
Joined: May 2025
Canon had this lens for about a decade now, about 4 years on the optically stabilized version. The Canon version is $1100. In December you will be able to but a Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 with optical stabilizer for about $1500. The Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 OS is about $1500 also. You can get a gently used 70-200mm 2.8 Nikon version 1 VR for about $1300. You can buy a non optically stabilized 70-200mm 2.8 Tamron for $800.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/10/24/...bilization
Posts: 68,354
Threads: 17,225
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
5
....something about this SMELLS funny....
_____________________________________
I reject your reality and substitute my own!
Posts: 18,585
Threads: 3,277
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
Don't sugar coat it, pRICE... Tell us how you really feel!
Posts: 5,946
Threads: 982
Joined: Apr 2025
Reputation:
0
I'm with pRice on this one. I'm not really sure why a 70-200 f4.0 VR should cost $1400. For that price, I'd get a used 70-200 f2.8 VR1 or the sigma 70-200 OS.
Posts: 31,028
Threads: 2,688
Joined: May 2025
a full stop for $100? I'd take that, if IQ holds up.
Posts: 1,122
Threads: 53
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
When I switched from Canon to Nikon (well, not a complete switch), this was one of the lenses that I wish Nikon had an equivalency.
Now, I wonder why.
Frankly, if I did action photography, I'd bite the bullet and get an f/2.8.
Otherwise, I want my telephoto lens to go to 300mm or 400mm.
