Which One? Nikkor 80-200 or 70-200VR 2.8

[90 5.0]

Originally Posted by silversixx

Thanks for all of the great information and suggestions everyone!
I think that Im going to putt the trigger on the 80-200 soon. No matter what It will be better than the 18-200 3.5-5.6 VR lens I have now...
Oh Im going to be using is with a D300, I planned on getting a FX camera in the semi near future ( in year or two) after I finish school.

Thanks again everyone!
Jonathan

Cool I would just try to make sure you got the af-s version not the slower focusing af-d.

[silversixx]

Originally Posted by 90 5.0

Cool I would just try to make sure you got the af-s version not the slower focusing af-d.

I will look for that one. thanks!

[90 5.0]

Originally Posted by silversixx

I will look for that one. thanks!

http://www.adorama.com/US%20%20%20%2...on+80-200+af-s

1,100 used in condition e

It is worth note that only the older af-d version is still available new. The af-s was dicontinued new with the arival of the 70-200vr.

new af-d with 5 year warranty is 100.00 buck cheaper than the used af-s.

http://www.adorama.com/NK80200AFNU.h...on+80-200+af-s

[Gildersleeve]

I used to have a nikon 80-200 AF-S. It will used the tele-converters as well. Sharp lens and fast to focus. My only concern about that lens was that after a while, it became hard to rotate in the tripod mount. That has been corrected in the 70-200 VR.

[thequintessentialman]

I managed to track down one of the AF-S 80/200 lens earlier last year and have really enjoyed it. Since my first exposure to automatic lens was the AF-S, I cannot give a comparison. What I did learn though, while searching for this lens, is that Nikon has apparently been making a 80/200 lens since the beginning of time. If you decide to buy used, make sure that you do your research just to make sure you realize what you are buying.

For what it's worth, the AF-S 80/200 also still has the apparature ring and manual focus so it can be used on older camera bodies (I still have my old FE2, although I have not seen it since I got the D200; forgot where I put it...)

It is also worth looking into how long you can get service on an item after it goes out of production.

BTW, stay away from the 2x teleconverter on this lens, you will be disappointed. I was told by a few members of TPF and another friend not to use more than the 1.7x, (I use the Kenko; unless there are some new ones, I think that Nikon's TCs are incompatible) but I had to see for myself... OK, now I know.

[jtriron]

Originally Posted by silversixx

Like the title states, which one should I get? The price difference is absolutely ridiculous if the only difference is 10mm and vibration reduction. Am I missing something else? The price for the non VR is around a grand with a warranty. the VR is about 2g with a warranty. Im an aspiring professional photographer, so I need professional glass. I didn't know if their could be a difference in the glass in the lenses as well.

Thanks everyone

Jonathan

The 70-200 2.8 VR Nikon lens is just about as good as it it gets in this Nikon zoom range, If however you do not use that particular size lens as an everyday "work" lens in a professional setting then the less expensive lens may be a good choice.
But remember good glass last a long time.

J

[90 5.0]

Originally Posted by jtriron

The 70-200 2.8 VR Nikon lens is just about as good as it it gets in this Nikon zoom range, If however you do not use that particular size lens as an everyday "work" lens in a professional setting then the less expensive lens may be a good choice.
But remember good glass last a long time.

J

This is very true but just starting out for close to the same cost he could have a used 80-200 af-s AND a used 28-70 af-s for the same price as a new 70-200vr, the 2 lenses i think would serve him better than the 10mm and vr as a beginning pro, but this is solely my opinion and might not be true for everyone, especially if you shot almost completely in the 70-200 range.

[garykohs]

Jonathan,

I'm not really sure that the AF-S is worth it over the AF-D. But I'm no longer a Nikon guy so I don't keep up with this. My impression, though, is that the AF-D focuses just about as fast as the AF-S and is considerably smaller and lighter.

For what it's worth, consider Ken Rockwell's comments at http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/80200.htm

I should add that you shouldn't consider Ken Rockwell's comments as gospel. He's an informed Nikon guy, a great photographer, and he has strong opinions. So he's always an interesting read. But he's just one of many.

[90 5.0]

Originally Posted by garykohs

Jonathan,

I'm not really sure that the AF-S is worth it over the AF-D. But I'm no longer a Nikon guy so I don't keep up with this. My impression, though, is that the AF-D focuses just about as fast as the AF-S and is considerably smaller and lighter.

For what it's worth, consider Ken Rockwell's comments at http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/80200.htm

I should add that you shouldn't consider Ken Rockwell's comments as gospel. He's an informed Nikon guy, a great photographer, and he has strong opinions. So he's always an interesting read. But he's just one of many.

I am a Nikon guy and have been for a long time so I'll clarify your comments. The op didn't say which body he was using and will have a major impact on how fast the screw drive lens focuses.

On a D2h/sx/xs/3/3x/3s it will focus almost as fast.

On a D700 it'll be slower
On a D300/200 it will me quite a bit slower

On a D90/80 it will be even slower.

On a 70/50 it will be painfully slow

On a D40/x/60 It won't focus at all.

And there's not much difference in size, both lenses are pretty large.

[RKEnnis]

Originally Posted by 90 5.0

On a D2h/sx/xs/3/3x/3s it will focus almost as fast.

On a D700 it'll be slower
On a D300/200 it will me quite a bit slower

On a D90/80 it will be even slower.

On a 70/50 it will be painfully slow

On a D40/x/60 It won't focus at all.

It never occurred to me that the focus motor on the D300 and D700 would be slower than, say, the D2h. Very interesting.

[90 5.0]

Originally Posted by RKEnnis

It never occurred to me that the focus motor on the D300 and D700 would be slower than, say, the D2h. Very interesting.

Yes the larger bodies have larger focus motors, I've heard but have no personal experience with the f4/5/6 have the largest focus motors like the D2/3 also. But don't quote me on that. My only Af film body is a N75 and that thing has a micro motor.