Comments on Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED

[jestev]

Hey folks.

I've been noticing how weak my Nikkor 70-300G is since I got it a few years ago. Now I'm starting to do some work for a newspaper on campus that involves me taking a lot of photos of speakers, so I need a telephoto lens for these events. The Nikkor 70-300G is simply not fast enough. I know the step from the 70-300G to the Nikkor 80-200 or Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG APO Macro HSM. The reason why I bring the Sigma in here is that it is in the same price range as the Nikkor. The Sigma does have the advantage of HSM, but the Nikkor is a Nikkor. I've got another 3rd-party lens (Tokina 124), but the Nikkor is going to work on the next Nikon I get (unless they screw up with another D40/x). The Sigma may have to be re-chipped (of course, not the end of the world).

I'll also, of course, be using this new telephoto for things other than speakers.

So what are yalls takes? I know it's a lot of money, but I feel spending more now will save me money later. I also know that what I'm getting now probably won't cut it.

Thanks.

John

[jdepould]

You can get the 80-200 with AF-S. I have one without, I really don't even notice the different. I had the 70-300 VR, it wasn't even close to 80-200 in sharpness (and slow to boot).

[jestev]

You can get the 80-200 with AF-S. I have one without, I really don't even notice the different. I had the 70-300 VR, it wasn't even close to 80-200 in sharpness (and slow to boot).

I know you can get the 80-200mm with AF-S, it's just so much more expensive that getting it doesn't make too much sense to me compared to the 70-200mm VR.

[ray645]

The 80-200 2 touch (one zoom ring one focus ring, the one with the tripod foot) is plenty fast for event photography, I used one for sports for years on an F100, F5, D2h

http://www.pbase.com/ray645/nikkor_80200

the one ring version....not so hot in the AF department

neither is very fast with a TC, if you really think you want a TC look for a little bit ugly AFS version on Ebay ($900 less) they are pretty tuff some of the ones I used at the paper where more brass than black (KEH cameras used BARGIN lenses are B&H and Adorama's 8 out of 10)

Ebay an ugly 80-200 AFS or a new Sigma 70-200, both of these stay pretty fast with a TC.

Nikkor 80-200 non AFS


Sigma 70-200 HSM


I have owned all versions of this range, if you have any more questions feel free to ask

[charales]

I've got the 80-200 and I simply love it. It's fast and sharp. But if you doubt, maybe you could rent it for a couple of days before spending that amount.

[bertone61]

if AF-speed is not an issue go and get the 80-200/2,8. I have one and I also have the 70-200/2,8 (which is exactly double price where I live). the 70-200 is focusing much quicker, but in sharpness and overall image quality the 80-200 is as good as the 70-200 in the range of 150mm it is even better...
and yes in bad lighting conditions the VR of the 70-200 can help but it is not worth the price difference. to much fuss about it...