Nikon 80-200 f2.8 AF-D on D7000

v8moneypit

v8moneypit

Messages
942
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
I know this lens was intended for FX bodies, but would it be OK on the D7000? Or would I be better off biting the bullet and buying a used 70-200 VR1 at twice the money?
 
The 80-200mm is a fantastic lens. Really well made, great optics and only a tad slower to AF than the VR1. It's noisier for sure, but it's not fingernails on a blackboard stuff - you just hear a little torque spin as it tries to move that huge front element and then it's smooth as a baby's back end. :)

I used one for a few years on a D2x and it was flawless. Got it to replace a Sigma 70-200 and it was worth the change just for the build. Eventually swapped to a VR1 because I needed VR as a bit of a safety net... :)

The two-touch version with the separate rinsg for zoom and focus is the middle version, with the one-touch push/pull zoom version being the original AF-D. There was also an AF-S version that is supposed to be more like the VR1 for handling but it commands a premium on the used market - think £750 and above. You can get a good used two-touch AF-D for around £500 easily....
 
Last edited:
v8moneypit said:
I know this lens was intended for FX bodies, but would it be OK on the D7000? Or would I be better off biting the bullet and buying a used 70-200 VR1 at twice the money?
Click to expand...

Hi Steve.....I have used the 80-200 on both D90 and D300 with Great results. If you are looking at giving one a go you will not be disappointed....

Steve
 
whats the AF speed like on the two touch one that have seperate focus and zoom. I want to replace my sigma 70-200 f2.8 mkII HSM but can't afford the nikon VR version. My sigma AF speed is very fast and accurate.
 
I didn't notice any difference between my Sigma and the 80-200mm. Also, my Siggy needed the focus recalibrating straight out of the box, as it was back-focussing. It was all done promptly through the warranty by Sigma UK, but it was enough to put doubt in my head, which was one of the other reasons I went with the Nikon.

A used 70-200 VR1 is a very good buy on the used market - I picked mine up a year or so ago for £900 (boxed with case) and prices seem to have stayed pretty much the same. Optically, it's no different to the AF-D but I like the benefits the VR give, especially as my D2x doesn't have a high top-end ISO.
 
Thanks for the replies everyone. Much appreciated.

At half the price of a 70-200, I think I can live without the VR and look for an 80-200.

I'm looking at it to replace my Sigma 150-500. I just don't use it much and felt a shorter reach, smaller lens would get better use. So the Sigma is going up for sale soon. Great lens, but I just don't get enough use out of it. I have a Tamron 17-50 and Tamron 90 macro, so the 80-200 should compliment them well.
 
Last edited:
v8moneypit said:
Thanks for the replies everyone. Much appreciated.

At half the price of a 70-200, I think I can live without the VR and look for an 80-200.

I'm looking at it to replace my Sigma 150-500. I just don't use it much and felt a shorter reach, smaller lens would get better use. So the Sigma is going up for sale soon. Great lens, but I just don't get enough use out of it. I have a Tamron 17-50 and Tamron 90 macro, so the 80-200 should compliment them well.
Click to expand...

Hi Steve....i see that you picked up a Nikon 80-200 f2.8....how are you finding it..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top