Opinions on Nikon 80-200mm f2.8 ?

[NewNameNeeded]

Asking for a little help here. Stumbled in to Jessops over the weekend and the staff were playing with a D300 and the Nikon 70-200mm VR. Lovely lens and a tempting purchase. BUT the Nikon 80-200mm f2.8 AF-D is a lot cheaper and seems to come with excellent reviews. Also of consideration is its slighty smaller size and considerable weight saving over the 70-200mm. Obviously I lose the 70-80mm range.

So, has anyone used or owned the 80-200mm? or compared the two?

It'd be mounted on a D300.

Thanks
Matt

[beano500]

Haven't used the 80-200mm AF-D, but it gets good reviews and is virtually as good optically as the 70-200mm AF-S, it just hasn't got VR and the latest coating in addition to the obvious SWM.

Have you thought of looking for a used 80-200mm AF-S? Quicker to focus, if you need it, and good value if you can live without the VR.

I have to say the 70-200mm, despite being a little large and heavy, is a delight to use and turns out excellent results right up to f/2.8 at either end (and with TC14, when required) on DX sensor and the (demanding) D2X in particular. I expect the 80-200 will be every bit as good.

Edited to add link to a reliable reviewer: http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_zoom_03.html#AF8...

Edited by beano500 on Sunday 26th October 21:10

[fergusd]

I have a 80-200 afs ed d, used it a lot over the years, on a crop sensor it's perfect, very fast focus, very sharp, I like it a lot, it vignettes a little on a full frame sensor, but so does the 70-200 vr . . . all the 80-200s are highly regarded lenses . . .

This was taken with it . . .



Fd

Edited by fergusd on Sunday 26th October 23:58

[NewNameNeeded]

thanks guys. I see Grays of Westminster have a few so when their opening hours next fit my availability I'll pop in and give a few a try.

[Col 666]

Myself and my collegue both use the 80-200 AF-S f2.8 and have had no problems, its a great lens.
We use it for Motorsports, www.power-images.co.uk.
I used to use the 70-200 VR f2.8 and had a lot of problems with it ending up with me selling it on as I found it a bit hit or miss.

[Mroad]

I have had the AF-D and traded up for the AF-S (non VR). The focusing on the AF-S is quieter and quicker but I couldn't tell the difference in picture quality in fact I might free up some cash and trade back down again.

[DanH]

Col 666 said:

Myself and my collegue both use the 80-200 AF-S f2.8 and have had no problems, its a great lens.
We use it for Motorsports, www.power-images.co.uk.
I used to use the 70-200 VR f2.8 and had a lot of problems with it ending up with me selling it on as I found it a bit hit or miss.

What problems? I've heard of people turning off the VR for motorsports?

[bulb763]

Mroad said:

I have had the AF-D and traded up for the AF-S (non VR). The focusing on the AF-S is quieter and quicker but I couldn't tell the difference in picture quality in fact I might free up some cash and trade back down again.

Idle curiosity (and not 100% satisfied with my Sigma version) - what sort of price would you be looking for, if you don't mind me asking.

[Spooks]

Col 666 said:

Myself and my collegue both use the 80-200 AF-S f2.8 and have had no problems, its a great lens.
We use it for Motorsports, www.power-images.co.uk.
I used to use the 70-200 VR f2.8 and had a lot of problems with it ending up with me selling it on as I found it a bit hit or miss.

Funnily enough was gonna use you as an example Col, these lenses give excellent results. Seen Col's images and they are sharp with great colour reproduction, easily better than the results I get with my 70-200 2.8 (although he does have more experience than me)

[suntiger1965]

i use vr 80-200 for most of my photos at hillclimbs and race events

just strted my website www.pistonheadphotos.com..

ive only just started the web site in the last couple of days but had some cracking photos..

i tried non vr lens first as i thought with 2.8 and action shots i would not use vr part of lens but as alot of my photos are in lower light (forest rallies and hillclimbs) i decided on a vr lens and do not regret it... its fantastic ..

forget Jessops etc etc, i bought mine straight from Japan with 5 years warrenty for £850 (and its light grey /white) Nikon uk will cover first year warraenty on lenses but not on bodies..

your other option is a very welknown guy in scotland who is a member of pistonheads who mainly deals with canon but has started doing 80-200 and 70-200 nikons(someone help ive forgotten his name). his price for the vr was about the same but at the time he could only get the black lens not white and i wanted white due to the very hot days i sometimes use the lenses in..

if you do decide on a non VR, only go for the 's' version as the focasing is so much quicker..

dom

[NewNameNeeded]

Thanks for everyones help. I plumped for a Nikon 80-200mm AF-S for the grand price of £500 - which I thought was great for what seems optically in mint condition, but with minor wear and tear to the body (and it really is minor).

So far I'm impressed, but need to give it a proper work out before I decide if it is a keeper.

One further question though - how do people carry around such lenses? I've a Crumpler Pretty Boy XL which is not big enough for this lens and the D300.

Was thinking a dedicated case for the 80-200 ... thought the LowePro Lens Case 4 (http://www.lowepro-online.co.uk/Lowepro-Lens-Case-4-p-288.html) would fit the bill .... what do people with big glass use? Any other recommendations???

[beano500]

NewNameNeeded said:

I plumped for a Nikon 80-200mm AF-S for the grand price of £500

Sounds great. My 70-200 (a little bit more than that!) was also cosmetically used, but does the job.

I use a Lowepro Slingshot AW 200 a lot.

70-200 wouldn't fit on the body in this so I went for the Fastpack 300. Problem is this just takes so much kit, it then weighs me down something chronic!!

Also use Billingham bags - surprisingly I can cram the 70-200 on the D2X in a little Billingham, but can't carry anything else, or its a 445 for a moderate amount of kit, but the 70-200 doesn't easily fit when mounted.

So I am always on the lookout myself.

Been considering something like the HAMA Defender series recently....

[DanH]

NewNameNeeded said:

Thanks for everyones help. I plumped for a Nikon 80-200mm AF-S for the grand price of £500 - which I thought was great for what seems optically in mint condition, but with minor wear and tear to the body (and it really is minor).

So far I'm impressed, but need to give it a proper work out before I decide if it is a keeper.

One further question though - how do people carry around such lenses? I've a Crumpler Pretty Boy XL which is not big enough for this lens and the D300.

Was thinking a dedicated case for the 80-200 ... thought the LowePro Lens Case 4 (http://www.lowepro-online.co.uk/Lowepro-Lens-Case-4-p-288.html) would fit the bill .... what do people with big glass use? Any other recommendations???

lol I ordered a pretty boy xl and realised it wouldn't fit too. The daily's look like they are big enough.

I've got a backpack for my full kit, so just wanted something to chuck maybe 2 lenses + body + flash in max.

[Ledaig]

NewNameNeeded said:

One further question though - how do people carry around such lenses? I've a Crumpler Pretty Boy XL which is not big enough for this lens and the D300.

The Lowepro Slingshot 200aw is a good one, I've got a larger backpack case when needed, but the 200aw will hold a D3 with 24-70 attached, a 15-24 on its own, and the 80-200 on its side along the base. This still leaves the top pocket free for flash, blower, cards etc.

HTH

[suntiger1965]

LOWEPRO MINI TREKKER

great bag and takes everything i need
great price on ebay too..
dom