Nikon 70-200 f2.8 lens review: Nikon vs Tamron vs Sigma

Professional photographers Chelsea & Tony Northrup review these lenses:
* Tamron 70-210 f/4 Di VC USD
* Tamron SP 70-200 f/2.8 Di VC USD G2
* Sigma 70-200 f2.8 DG OS HSM
* Nikon AF-S 70-200 f/2.8E Nikkor
* Nikon Z 70-200 f/2.8 S Nikkor

Here's the table of contents & categories tested:
0:00 Introduction
0:28 Price
1:48 Size & Weight
1:55 Contrast & backlighting
5:14 Chromatic Aberration
5:43 Bokeh
7:22 Natural Light Portraits
15:31 Autofocus Tracking
16:35 Focal Shrinking
17:44 Stabilization
18:38 Sharpness

[IdleWind]

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.

[earthlingtheaaron]

I lost it when he said “disturbing amount of detail.” 😂😂😂

[guffey]

I've been extremely satisfied with the 70-210 f/4 adapted to my Z5. Serious value for money, and a near-macro shooter to boot. Thanks for sharing

[AD.H.]

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.

[ronnicolas]

I always appreciate the depth of your comparison reviews, especially lens characteristics that I don't often think about

[danivar]

"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!

[andrewmarquez]

I use Tamron 70-210 F4 with Z6 II for street photography. Its perfect for that as it lightweight and love the quality of photo I get.

[jamesromanoski]

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.

[ElliotFranco]

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.

[MrKaystew]

Man I am glad I got the Tamron 70-210 F4. I love how compact it is making me more likely to pull it out to take pics!

[robreneau]

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.

[JRBaker-fqbr]

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.

[nicktheobald]

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.

[pettere]

Would have liked to see the older Nikon G version of the f/2.8 too.

[ZHALILOVllDAILY]

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?

[ropeyarn]

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.

[derekclark]

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.

[perlundsgaardandersen]

Great video. It would have been fun if you included the 80-200 2.8 nikon just to see how things have moved on.

[WOLFTICKVIDEOS]

Thanks for all of the hours you put into this video. I can only imagine how much work had to go into this.

[richardyuen]

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 !