Eliminating price considerations, the lenses scored: 61, 39, 64, 63, 69. Eliminate weight as well and it goes to 51, 37, 64, 60, 65. Leaving the Sigma as the winner amongst DSLR lenses in "performance" categories. Though the Nikon and Sigma scored well in different categories so it really depends upon what is important to you. Thanks for the detailed comparison, very useful.
Interesting review but I appreciate the effort. However, to say "Tamron 70-200 isn't one you'd recommend" and it's disappointing?? That's very arguable and lots of professional photographers would disagree with that statement.
@@KylieSparticus it's the Tamron 70-210mm f/4 Di VC USD. Relatively new lens, can be had for pretty affordable used, and the photo quality punches well above it's price.
Hey ! I have a question, I want to change my 70-300 for a 70-200 f4. Did you use the tamron for animals and sport ? I don’t know if the price difference between the tamron 70-210 and the Nikon 70-200 f4 is worth or not
I can't tell you how much I come to rely upon you both for your reviews. I was looking for 70-200mm f2.8 but the Nikon brands were so much more expensive. I saw the Sigma at a more budget-friendly price, but I wanted to know how it compared. Your controlled, user-friendly, review gave me a better depth of knowledge to make my decision. I'm going with the Sigma because it handled well and was mid-priced.
"I know when I'm smiling nice bc i make you smile" Very cute. Also "If you look at the difference between these two lenses the first thing you notice is her smile bc that what portraits are about" So sweet. Nice comparison of lenses too!
Thank you doing such a thorough analysis. I'm mostly shooting Canon DSLR exclusively. But your reviews have helped with several of my past lens purchases (and very happy with those choices). Keep it up.
Thanks - this has made me glad I plumped for the Tamron 70-210 f4. Bought for (mainly) equestrian pics, I decided f2.8 was unnecessary as I mainly shoot outdoors in daylight and a shallow DoF was not really necessary. Paired with a Canon 70D and 6D I've been really pleased with the results. Great comparison review.
Dustin Abbott and Matt Granger did detailed reviews of the Tamron 70-200 g2 on their channels and they did great. They really liked the lens. Sharpness is excellent and autofocus speed is excellent. 70-200 g2 was not much inferior to the 2nd version from Canon 70-200 Matt Granger compared 70-210 and 70-200 g2. Autofocus on the 70-200 g2 was faster and it was sharper. Are they lying or are you? who to believe?
I often think about this as well. Although I will say I've owned the g2 for 6 years (and have had issues with it) and I have spent hours if not days researching people's thoughts and comments. It seems that many have success, many do not, and many have sent their lenses back multiple times before they got a acceptable one. So maybe that's why the difference in reviews results?
@@lior2538 pretty well the same way as it was working with Nikon D500 and I see no difference in autofocus and also its muuuch better than Sigma with FTZ (I have sigma art 35mm 1.4). there are an firmware update for compatibility with FTZ. When I bought the lens it alreay had that update, if not you can update it with tamron dock.
Hey ! I have a question, I want to change my 70-300 for a 70-200 f4. Did you use the tamron for animals and sport ? I don’t know if the price difference between the tamron 70-210 and the Nikon 70-200 f4 is worth or not
@@Pokzy I use it for street photography not for sports. Cant tell how it will perform for sports. But its much much cheaper than the nikom 70 200 F4. It costs 500 euros new and 400 second hand
If you had updated the Sigma via its docking station you would have found it worked, you could also have set the lens to adjust focus correctly, it works fine on F Nikon bodies, its razor-sharp fast focusing not flaky, and produces good contrary images with great bokeh, many a professional written magazine has rated it the same as the F mount Nikon lens so the price makes it a better buy. The price of the USB dock is a pittance and it allows you to change the lens setting to what suits you, and use those four buttons on the lens body in the same way as back button focus buttons, very handy. I think you have done the Sigma lens an injustice, it is extremely good and the price makes it the best lens there other than the Z lens which costs an arm and a leg.
I've bought quite a bit of equipment from KEH and they are my "Go-To" camera store also. I've got the Nikon AF-S VR 70-200 f2.8G lens cause it was in my price range. I've teested it in my neighborhood, but not in the field yet. My lens selection is 11 Nikon's and one Sigma. I've been interested in Nikon camera equipment since I was stationed in Hawaii in 1970, but couldn't afford one until 2015. Anyway, thanks for taking time to test out the equipment.
I bought (for $500) the Tamron 70-210 F4 earlier this year so I can have inexpensive 200mm lens for shooing mostly nature. Im really happy with how it performs, and its pretty light. I took it to vacation last month and then I learned how well it performs for portraits. This video just confirms that I bought right lens :) I would love to have Nikon 70-200 f2.8 but maan the price is just too much for me right now. Maybe in time.
There is another used lens alternative in the 80-200mm f2.8D Nikkor. It is heavy, sharp, and beautifully made. It is also cheap at the moment. Since the AF is screw drive it would be manual focus on a Z body. I do not recommend manual focusing as it is difficult with such a narrow DOF.
Thanks again for a very useful video but a little constructive criticism from an 8 year subscriber and customer, I've noticed the production quality and frequency of uploads has been decreasing lately, you're my favourite photographery channel and I have notifications turned on for your videos so this is coming from a place of love, no hate
I forgot to add thank you Tony and Chelsea for your hard work and putting this video out there is thoroughly entertaining informative and very much appreciated.
Love this! I just bought the Sigma and so far love it! The eye af works great with the Canon R6 and R mount. Not sure why the Nikon had issues for you all.
I bought the Nikon 70-200 f2.8 VR I Gray version from someone in super good condition and still inside the box. I'm happy and thank you for your amazing lens review and the stats you show at the end of the video. Got it for $750
Tony overblows focus breathing out of proportions. For real life shooting (for people with legs, Tony not included) the effects are negligible if even noticeable. I had Tamron 70-200 G2 and Nikon 70-200 FL and have not seen much difference optically. Ended up keeping the Tamron G2 and trading the FL for Nikon 105 1.4 (plus cash). So people should not be afraid of looking into Tamron G2, it has a number of unique advantages.
I had the 70-200 Tamron G2 on my D850 instead of the FL ..What a great lens . However nothing beats my current Z version Nikon on my Z7 ..Next level asnd widely acknowledged as the Best 70-200 f2.8 ever made all brands included
Pointing out that a product does not deliver what you paid for is never blowing it out of proportion, it’s just stating a fact that is relevant to prospective buyers. There are many real world scenarios where taking even one step forward is physically impossible. If I pay for 200mm, I want 200mm.
I had a Tamron G2 on a D850, but focus/chromatic/all round results not good. Swapped it for another - not much better, also sent back. Then got the Nikon F mount - different league. Shame as the Tamron felt well built and obviously good value.
@@lenzyruffin agreed but Tony's test seems subjective as Ricci did exactly the same test with a camera body and shows almost no breathing so I guess you have to do your own research unless these reviewers can come up with an agreed upon test and terminology
Very interesting and I too appreciate the effort that went into this testing. Some of these criteria should not have equal weight, although what may be more important could vary amongst different photographers. They pretty much glossed over the sharpness, especially in the corners, which could make more difference to a lot of people than was expressed in this presentation. Getting that right can be costly.
You could make a simple little excel, use the scores from the review, multiply with a weight factor yourself and see for yourself what the outcome would be for you, given your own weight factors.
Regarding weight and price comparisons, it seems somewhat unfair to include an f4 lens in this test. It might also be an idea to brainstorm the percentage value of each of the features so that sharpness ranks relatively higher than weight, for example. Anyway, thank you for all the work that goes into such a comparison.
You can do this yourself. Grab their scores, put them in an excel sheet and multiply by a weigth factors per category you choose. You can play around varying weight factors and you ll get an idea where the lenses are at. For me, weight is not a factor but light and sharpness is.Then you ll get your preference outcome.
Credible review. Most youtubers nowadays presenting how good canon and sony is, some of them just review nikons bad gears but never appreciate their good ones. You guys showed how good nikkor z 24-70 f2.8 s is compared with sony and canon.
You showed the Tamron when you presented the Sigma right? Good test. I already own one of them after trying another one of them before and I'm more than pleased with it.
Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 Sport works fine with the mc11 on Sony. Eye AF was amazing. Only thing I didn't like was the weight. I did eventually trade it in with some other stuff for the 135 1.8 GM
I just really love your content. Even if I I cannot afford the products that you showcase I just love watching your videos and the information you provide. Keep posting these type of videos and do keep up the great work.
The results you are getting with the Tamrom f2 G2 is not the results thatI get with my copy. Bokeh is better and backlit shots handle better than what shows in your images.
Great review, I was looking for something like this few months ago when I was shopping for 70-200 lens to my Nikon. I used your channel also to inform my decision and I'm very happy with my sigma. Your latest review just confirms that I chose right 😊 thanks for all your content 😊
Thanks for another great video, Tony & Chelsea. You do take testing to a whole new level. I got the Nikon F mount G model, bought two weeks ago secondhand for about 1000 $, and I am very pleased with the performance.
Good comparison. I've owned all these, except the Sigma. Your top marks lens, the 70-210 (cheapest), did not work out for me, besides being the cheapest and smallest. I've taken many photos , they are good but not one that made me say "WOW". I do not get into the nitty gritty specs. It's what makes me say "OMG" ! whatever that is !! The Z70-200 will consistently give me that. The F- mount E lens is a close second. Just my opinion. Thanks for the video guys !
Having arrived very late to the D850, this video has been incredibly helpful sorting out my 70-200 options. Thanks for the excellent work that continues to be of value to F6, F5, and F100 legacy photographers. Brand new D850s are still an incredible value, provided they are attached to the right glass. Steve Briggs
Enjoyed the review, I have the Nikon F 70-200mm f2.8e for both my Z7 and D850 and it performs as expected. I was hoping the difference between the Nikon Z 70-200mm would have been better (my friend isn't going to like this because he sold his F mount in favor for the Z mount), so at this time there is no need for me to buy another lens. I was very surprised that the $400 lens actually beat everyone out, goes to show the more expensive does not equates to better performance.
how you're doing i just got my canon 80d and i want a good zoom lens like the sigma 70-200 and it's all black and i see it takes great pictures. i want a few lens but i don't want to kill my pockets you understand. but i'm in love with sigma products and plus it's cheaper than canon. i guess those photographers can buy them cause they get paid i do this for fun and i want to be good at what i do ya see.i want to get this 70-200 f2.8 over the canon 55-250 so i want your opinion i'm going to buy the 18-35 sigma lens the 35mm 1.4 sigma lens and the 70-200 that's a good combination right? i was thinking 24-105 and the 24mm pancake lens and my collection is complete
Thanks for this wonderful comparison, I personally choose the AF-P NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6E ED VR. A feather-light lens! It might be a bit out of the equation, but I know a lot of photographers who chose this option. For those who are interested, I have a comparison between this Nikon and a Sigma lens on my channel.
My take on this... the Tamron 70-200 G2 for Nikon is a good lens ,IF you can put up with the inconsistency of the focus. The Nikon is higher priced, but focus is probably more consistent, so you're paying for that. Never shot with the Sigma, but have heard some good things about it. So it really comes down to focus accuracy and speed, and how much you want to spend. For non-professionals, I'd say the Tamron or Sigma should be sufficient, but for working professionals, the Nikon is the better choice. And if you don't want to spend an arm and a leg but want a Nikon lens, you can always get the slower, but still great, 70-200 f/4 version.
I have the Sigma lens and found the firmware update helpful, that being said I’ve been wrestling with idea of buying the 70-200 S lens for my z7ii. Thanks for your work here. I’ll keep my Sigma and wrestle no more. Or was this the pill I needed to relieve my G.A.S.
Great work, guys! Tony, you're my favorite nerd of all time! I've had my old gen Sigma 70-200mm since about 2012, I think. It's time for an upgrade and this video helped immensely. I'm going with the latest Sigma 70-200. I can deal with the slow AF since it will be primarily for portraits. I got the Nikon 200-500 that has excellent AF on my D850 & D500 bodies with wildlife and sports!
Awesome comparison but in real life the Nikon z 70-200 is much much better then the Nikon F 70-200 FL, and the difference is even bigger compared to the VR2 and VR1. Compared to sigma and Tamron in my books the difference is even bigger. So if money is not an issue go for the z mount lens, for sure! If money is an issue, go for the VR 2 Nikon version.
Just want to thank you guys for all you do! I am in the market for a new 70-200 and this video is a great help in my decision. Thank you again! Be well.
Very interesting video, but I have no buyer’s remorse for my Z 70-200 f2.8 S lens. One test you didn’t do that I thought was critical, is color rendering. The Z lens does a great job of that, and I get better looking bokeh out of it than yours, and that’s on my Z6, even. Maybe that’s why it was for sale at KEH, huh? I had a Sigma 150-600 Contemporary lens that brand new wouldn’t focus properly out of the box. I got it exchanged for another one, and it works fine, but not as well as the focus on my Z lens. So much so that I got the Z 2X TC to use with it, when I don’t need quite the reach, like in Sports photography. I still use that Sigma for bird and wildlife, though, as it’s good enough to get 50% of the shots focused, on my Z, or at 33%+ on my D7100. So usage does play a big part in picking a winner. However, I had to say that I ado find it hard to believe that the little cheaply Tamron could beat the Z lens. If that were really the case, Nikon would have not made it, I think. What would be the point? Focus ability should be weighted a bit more, too. If the cheap Tamron can’t get you more than 25% winners, versus 90%+ on the Z, then that will more than be worth the price difference. What do you think?
So just curious about the focusing issue that you had with the Sigma 70-200. Was this only on the Nikon mirrorless body or by chance was this also checked on any other Nikon body, Such as the D500 or D850? Curious if you did by chance. Thanks and keep the great videos coming.
I'm sure someone has already said this, but you should have clarified one thing. The Sigma lens is the newer Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 "Sports". Not the older "APO EX" from 2010. Perhaps it's redundant and people assume that you're talking about the latest model.
Thanks for this comparison. I've been shooting (mostly concert photography) with a Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 for a few years now. At the time I bought it, I thought it had a better VR rating than the then-equivalent Nikon lens. Now that I spend much more time shooting than I figured I would back then, I kinda wish I had invested instead in the Nikon lens. This review/comparison is contributing "confirmation bias" to my thoughts on getting the Nikon Z-mount version. :) Given my need for a good low-light shooter, the f/4 lens isn't going to be what I get next. The Nikon F-mount, Sigma, and Nikon Z-mount are very close in score, but if I take away the price factor, the Z-mount version pulls further ahead.
So now we need you to do this for Canon and Sony. I have the Tamron f2.8 on Canon and I notice that at close focus it doesn't zoom out much (focus length seems to stay in about the same from 150 to 200). I'm also interested in a lighter lens. The 70-210 looks nice especially at used price
I still use tamron G1 VC USD 2.8 and provide great value used is now just 500 what makes it very affordable option , I bought used g1 70-200 and 24-70 both 2.8 for like 1000 euro together with warranty and I still use em, not perfect but covered from 24 up to 200 at 2.8 for price of one new lense is great value
The test winner also has a sibling in the "HD Pentax-D FA 70-210mm F4 ED SDM WR" lens. I think it is "joint" development but not sure how much each company contributed. The Tamron tripod collar works fine on the Pentax though (Pentax does not officially sell/provide a tripod collar).
I have the Sigma and Tamron but really want the Nikon 70-200 2.8. My Sigma is great, My Tamron couldn't focus, had to send it to the factory but they don't ship to APOs to it's been sitting at my Father-in-laws's house for the last three years. With that said i have a Tamron 24-70 and it's an awesome lense.
i dont understand why all the new 70-200 lenses move the zoom ring away from the body. especially with the focus by wire approach with the Z lenses and the awful manual focus performance of it, why would you want the focus ring closer to the camera? i found the manual focus override to be triggered alot when reaching for the zoom ring over the focus ring, which is quite an awful design flaw.
You are the first and only reviewer who had given tampon G2 version a bad rating in your test lol others including fstoppers adorama dpreview and many many others have all rated G2 highly Why is that ?
@@barryobrien1890 That Sigma is the newest 70-200 2.8. It is definitively supported. The old ones are not even in this test and not relevant to this video.
I agree with that. The Nikkor 70-200mm f/4 F-mount lens is fantastic. Lighter, more affordable and it does not suffer from ficus breath. Adding Nikon’s own f/4 lens to the review would have been both interesting and provided more balance. It would have been better not to have only one f/4 lens in the review.
Thank you for the honesty, and properly prefacing judgements with the explanation that the art is more important than the cost of the equipment. And then ultimately explaining why the super expensive new lens is valuable in specific situations. And the icing on the cake is the unscripted chatter between the 2 of you as you work, just lovely. Thank you again.
How refreshing to see a video focused on the lens performance not looking at the perceived limitations of the camera. Really great video that I am sure Nikon users will appreciate. If you can look at the 24-70, 105 2.8 and the long lenses when they come out in the same manner that would be awesome!
I love my Nikon 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3G ED VR AF-S DX Zoom Lens , I never have to change my lens. It is so versatile, and lucky for me it adapted automatically to my d750.
1. So glad I sold my 70-200 Tamron before you released this video, lol 2. Can’t wait for a Sigma 70-200 DN. Not surprised that the F-mount Sigma isn’t working well adapted to Z-mount. With the MC-11 on E-mount it works, flawlessly however. Gotta love that MC-11, just wish it played well with teleconverters.
If you've already got an F/4, it would also be interesting to compare it to some of the vintage 80-200mm lenses for a true budget alternative. If you go full manual, you wouldn't even have to pay 40$ for some of them.
Thank you very much! You have done a great service. You have been professional precise and detailed. Your tests are invaluable for those like me who cannot afford to test every single lens especially the most recent ones on the market. (Sorry for my bad english) Thanks from Italy for your invaluable work.
Thank you for your great reviews. I’m an enthusiast nature & wildlife photographer. More often than not; we look for quality used gears. How about reviewing some used cameras and lenses for us? Specifically, I would like to mention; Canon 5D Classic, 5DII, 1D Mark IV and 7D. And lenses EF 400mm f/5.6L, EF 300mm f/2.8L version 1 and EF 100-400mm. On the Nikon front it can be D700, D300 and D3 while the lenses can be Nikkor 80-400mm, Nikkor 300 f/4. Perhaps all of these great equipment might be available with ebay and KEH.
I have the sigma 70-200 f2.8 S, the 500 f4 S and 150-600 S and shoot with a canon R6, the eye and animal eye AF works flawlessly with the EF to RF adaptor on all three lenses. Sigma has always had focus issues on Nikon bodies.
It's been a while since I saw you guys. Always a fair revue. Matt Granger mentioned you and I remember the last time was with Jared Polin, Froknowsphoto. I buy used alot. I find the Nikon z7 and their F4 lens is fine with me. It can be the 14-30 or the 24-200. I still have my Nikon 105 F 2.8 afs works great. Anyway guys. Great revue. Keh, B&H and adorama are great to deal with.
