Nikon 2.8mm 70-200mm Spot the difference

cornishboy

cornishboy

Messages
578
Edit My Images
Yes
Anyone able to tell me the difference between an AF and AF_S Nikon 70-200mm 2.8?
Anyone used one? How does it compare to the newer and more expensive 2.8 or indeed the sigma 2.8?

Thanks
 
As as I know there is only 1 version. Well 2, if you count the VRII version, but both are AF-S
 
The new 70-200mm af-s VR 11 lens is far superior to the older 80-200mm - of which ever type.
 
80-200 AF-D came in a push/pull version and a two-ring zoom, the latter being the latest model. Because it's AF-D it uses the camera body motor to power the AF so is considered great optically but not as good in the AF stakes as the later 80-200mm AF-S, which is effectively the precursor to the popular 70-200mm VR. The AF-D two-ring I have is the nuts optically.

Wasn't there something on here about the VRII that it doesn't actually work out as 200mm when used on FX....
 
Last edited:
specialman said:
Wasn't there something on here about the VRII that it doesn't actually work out as 200mm when used on FX....
Click to expand...

Yep, focus breathing.

If you like to shoot the older version say around 3 to 4 meters (for close up birds, or Puffins in my case), the newer version drops its focal length by around 40 to 50mm - in other words to get that back, you need to use a 1.4x TC on the lens.

If you shoot objects further away, both lenses are true 200mm.

For anyone needing true 200mm close up (within 5 meters) the focus breathing is something folks need to be aware of.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top