Talk to me about the Nikon 80-200 f2.8

Nawty

Nawty

Messages
6,473
Name
Ned
Edit My Images
Yes
I've just upgraded to a D90 and am now looking to upgrade my lenses too.

The 80-200 F2.8 seems to fit the bill of being a good spec for an everyday zoom but as far as I can gather it comes in a lot of different varieties (one ring, two ring, push/pull etc) so I need to know the pro's and con's of each (do they work with TCs?) and whether it's worth getting the newer 70-200 2.8?

Could anyone please enlighten me? :)
 
Having had an 80-200 AF-D 2 ring, and currently have the 70-200 VR II, I can say the following.

The AI versions, whilst cheap, will show their age both in image quality and in convenience. Manual focus might be your thing, but I certainly like AF!

The 1 ring AF I can't really comment on, other than that the AF will be slower than a very slow thing when tranquilised.

The 2 ring AF-D is much much faster to focus than the previous version, and has exceptionally good image quality. Whilst it doesn't have the Silent Wave Motor, nor VR, it's fairly fast to focus, and is epicly sharp. Also, for the price, it a serious contender if you are on a budget / want to save money for something else.

The 2 ring AF-S version is so rare you might as well not bother looking for one unless you are prepared to pay a lot of money for one. Focus is very fast, and image quality and sharpness are comparable if not better than the AF-D version.

The 70-200 VR is an awesome lens. I'd go as far as saying it's potentially as sharp as the 80-200 AF-S. I've not used this lens, so can't really comment on this lens in great detail, other than what I know from general opinion. VR works and works well. Focus is very fast and image quality in general is excellent. However, this was designed when digital sensors from Nikon were DX only. As a result of the optical formula for this lens, it is likely to vignett at certain focal length and aperture combinations when on a FF body such as the D700 / D3/s/X. If you plan on using it on a DX body only, then this is a fantastic lens.

The 70-200 VR II is frankly one of the most outstanding lenses I have used. Ever. The focus is as fast as my 24-70 (virtually instant), the VR works so well, I had to check the camera settings again when using it for the first time, and by god is it sharp. It is also the closest focusing of all the lenses in this range. It does however command the highest price tag. So, if you have enough money to spend and you plan on using a lens of this range often, I highly recommend the VR II. However, if this is just too steep, the VR I is still a belter of a lens. If the budget is tight, and/or VR+SWM is not a necessity, the 80-200 AF-D is about as sharp as pretty much any of the best lenses out there.
 
Brilliant, thanks guys :)

Thing is, I don't actually photograph THAT much but when I do (like when I'm traveling) I would like to be able to capture the moment and it's become blindingly obvious that the glass is what counts (for example, the 55-200VR is all well and good but won't help capture moving orangutans in the dark Bornean jungle).

So, although the 70-200 would be nice I suspect the 80-200 would suit me perfectly. There's actually a 2-ring AF-D version in the classifieds now, hmmm :thinking:
 
I have had the 70-200 VR1 and didn`t use it enough to justify it being sat in a pelicase.So I sold it and got the 80-200 AFD, I could not tell the difference in IQ between the two lenses, but,as stated above, the 70-200 is lighter,has VR etc etc.

It really does depend on your budget,both are very good lenses.

Edit to add about TC`s..........The 70-200 takes all nikon TC`s ,the 80-200 only Kenko,AFAIK.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top