Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

with or without tripod mount

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 8:30:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I am looking to buy a used 80-200 f/2.8 lens for my D70 and was wondering
what the consensus was on the tripod mount option? The older nikkor version
has no tripod mount. Am I going to miss this terribly? I will mostly use
this to take indoor sporting event pics and pics of my kids in less than
perfect lighting situations. I know this is a fairly heavy lens and was
wondering if I should just bite the bullet and go with a newer version. What
are everyones opinions on an off brand lens of this type a well (sigma,
tamron,Tokina)?? any help will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Mike
--

More about : tripod mount

January 12, 2005 11:02:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

If it comes to that, you can make a wooden tripod mount...squarish, with a
1/4"-20 threaded insert in the bottom.
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 12:57:44 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 17:30:58 -0600, "rwesurfn"
<rwesurfn@cox-internet.com> wrote:

>I am looking to buy a used 80-200 f/2.8 lens for my D70 and was wondering
>what the consensus was on the tripod mount option? The older nikkor version
>has no tripod mount. Am I going to miss this terribly?

The older versions are also push-pull zooms, if it matters to you. I
use one of the older 80-200 f/2.8D's. For tripod use, I add a Bogen
3420 lens support. The result is a more stable mount than any
lens-based tripod mount I've tried, but at a cost in both convenience
and weight.

While I use a F100, I suspect that on a D70 the older models'
autofocus speed would be somewhat leisurely.

--
Michael Benveniste -- mhb-offer@clearether.com
Spam and UCE professionally evaluated for $419. Use this email
address only to submit mail for evaluation.
Related resources
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 10:57:40 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I just bought Nikon's 80-200mm f/2.8 D ED AF lens for my D70. First
time out, I was able to take some decent pictures of my son playing
hockey in a rink that was dim by even hockey rink standards without a
tripod. I forgot my glasses though, so I was only using the "sports"
setting of the exposure choices. About half of the pictures were
underexposed, so I'm going to have to fool around with exposure
settings, but ball park, I don't think I'm going to need a tripod for
taking action hockey shots.
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 3:09:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

rwesurfn wrote:

> I am looking to buy a used 80-200 f/2.8 lens for my D70 and was wondering
> what the consensus was on the tripod mount option? The older nikkor version
> has no tripod mount. Am I going to miss this terribly? I will mostly use
> this to take indoor sporting event pics and pics of my kids in less than
> perfect lighting situations. I know this is a fairly heavy lens and was
> wondering if I should just bite the bullet and go with a newer version. What
> are everyones opinions on an off brand lens of this type a well (sigma,
> tamron,Tokina)?? any help will be greatly appreciated.

Collar. Nuff said. (See if there are add on collars for the older version, as
well, I'm not clear on whether this is possible).

Tokina make a decent 80-200 f/2.8, but not as sharp as Nikon/Sigma. Tamron
don't seem to have such a lens (I may be wrong).

Nikon have it in several incarnations. The ED / IF-ED versions come with a
collar AFAIK. They are sharper than the Tokina and Sigmas

Sigma have two that are rated in sharpness close to the Nikon. Get your hands
on one and see how you like the build quality before you commit.

G'luck.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 3:37:06 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Aldo Pignotti wrote:

> I just bought Nikon's 80-200mm f/2.8 D ED AF lens for my D70. First
> time out, I was able to take some decent pictures of my son playing
> hockey in a rink that was dim by even hockey rink standards without a
> tripod. I forgot my glasses though, so I was only using the "sports"
> setting of the exposure choices. About half of the pictures were
> underexposed, so I'm going to have to fool around with exposure
> settings, but ball park, I don't think I'm going to need a tripod for
> taking action hockey shots.

Hockey is played on white ice. This tends to fool the exposure system to think
there is more light than there actually is. Best to find the proper setting
using the histogram and monitor and then set it manually and leave it. Much
more consistent results.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 8:06:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Thank you all for your suggestions and comments, I just bought a tokina
80-400 from KEH (excellent place to do business with by the way) and it
seems to be a decent lens, a little soft on the long end but, for my needs
is adequate for now. I am going to take my camera to the store this weekend
and try out a few lenses.
Thanks again for the help
Mike

--



"rwesurfn" <rwesurfn@cox-internet.com> wrote in message
news:10ubcpdchm3mga3@corp.supernews.com...
>
> I am looking to buy a used 80-200 f/2.8 lens for my D70 and was wondering
> what the consensus was on the tripod mount option? The older nikkor
> version has no tripod mount. Am I going to miss this terribly? I will
> mostly use this to take indoor sporting event pics and pics of my kids in
> less than perfect lighting situations. I know this is a fairly heavy lens
> and was wondering if I should just bite the bullet and go with a newer
> version. What are everyones opinions on an off brand lens of this type a
> well (sigma, tamron,Tokina)?? any help will be greatly appreciated.
> Thanks,
> Mike
> --
>
>
>
>
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 1:35:10 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I've taken tens of thousands of sports shots, and never used a tripod. I
can't really imagine how you could. A monopod, certainly, but never a
tripod.

Rob

--------------------------

"Aldo Pignotti" wrote ...
>I just bought Nikon's 80-200mm f/2.8 D ED AF lens for my D70. First
> time out, I was able to take some decent pictures of my son playing
> hockey in a rink that was dim by even hockey rink standards without a
> tripod. I forgot my glasses though, so I was only using the "sports"
> setting of the exposure choices. About half of the pictures were
> underexposed, so I'm going to have to fool around with exposure
> settings, but ball park, I don't think I'm going to need a tripod for
> taking action hockey shots.
!