How much for a legendary Tamron SP LD 80-200 F2.8

[TPS]

Hallo

I know it is Christmas time and we should all celebrate it in a way, but being couple of hours later here in Poland I realized I got a bit crazy about MF lenses for my A6300

As some of you know - Tamron SP LD 80-200 (30A) is a legend as far as sharpness and overall quality. It is heavy though, but fast.

I found some Tamrons (30A) on ebay, and I can see they (more the sellers) tend to keep the price high. Given that, I wonder what is the max reasonable price to pay for such MF and fast lens like Tamron 30A?

Moreover I have a bit slower but also sharp Zeiss 80-200F4, which I know works great outdoors, paid for it around 150 USD. Tamrons starts from 350 USD, and there is one in mint condition for ~550 USD.

Do I have fast tele alternative? Yes! SEL70-200F2.8 for far more USD

Do I need such fast lens? I dunno. For indoor sport maybe (?)

It is tempting to possess fast MF tele lens for my A6300. But money does not grow in my garden that is why I am asking you

[TrueLoveOne]

There is another option for a fast manual tele-zoom, if you are patient you can find one for less than 100. The Tokina AT-X f/2.8 80-200mm.

It's a very nice lens, but they can suffer from a hazy element inside which cannot be cleaned. But even with the haze it is able to shoot some decent pictures!
See my thread about one of these (with haze!) here: http://forum.mflenses.com/tokina-at-x-sd-2-8-80-200-hazy-element-t74276,highlight,%2Btokina+%2Batx.html

Merry Christmas!
René.

[marcusBMG]

I kept a note of auction final prices for a number of adaptall lenses for a couple of years. The 30A only crops up occasionally. Average price was ~£180 from 9 auctions. Highest £313, lowest £93 though that one was faulty.

The SP 70-210mm 19AH is just a wee step down optically, f3.5 vs f2.8 (not f2!) - probably matches the 30A at the shorter focal lengths where IME it excels. Not quite so good at the longer end. Not too difficult to pick up one for around fifty quid.

[TPS]

[Lloydy]

I've got the Tokina, with a bit of haze, and it's still a very good lens. It's certainly not perfect, but with some processing the images are very good. I like it a lot.

[Himself]

Title corrected to a more reasonable f/2.8 instead of f/2.
Moving on.

[TrueLoveOne]

[Basilisk]

The A6300 looks like it has pretty good high ISO performance. So hand-held is perfectly reasonable (with decent technique) with a long fast lens. I have a 500mm f6.3 that I use at 1/800 in daylight regularly without having to use mad ISOs

[iangreenhalgh1]

Seeing as you already have the Zeiss 4/80-200, the Tamron would seem a waste of time just to gain a stop.

I use the Minolta 4/70-210 on my a850 often and with the anti shake, it is never a problem to handhold it unless it's really dark.

[justtorchit]

I'm not sure you need the lens, but then do we really need all these lenses? Fair price: I think you could find one for between $200-300 in very good condition shape, and less for a heavily used copy. But those sales would likely be an actual auction on eBay or a 'Buy It Now'. I found mine for $250 in near mint condition with the original box (BIN).

[stevemark]

Instead of using an MF lens, you might also consider the Minolta AF 2.8/80-200mm APO. Even though is has only one AD (anomalous dispersion) glass element, i outperforms the AF ED Nikkor 2.8/80-200mm on 24 MP FF. Its price is far more reasonable that the Minolta/Sony AF (AL) 2.8/70-200mm G SSM.

The Minolta AF 4/70-210mm is quite OK in the 70-135mm range; from 150mm on, the MinAF 2.8/80-200mm APO is visibly better, at least on 24MP FF (i have not used these lenses on 24MP APS-C).

Stephan

EDIT i would NOT recommend the Tokina AT-X 2.8/80-200mm; its image quality at f2.8 is distinctively worse compared to the Nikkor AF 2.8/80-200mm ED and the Minolta AF 2.8/80-200mm APO.