Fri Jan 25, 2008 2:16 am
I'd go with the d-80. The 70-300 is an accepstable enrty zoom. It's soft at 300, but adaquate at 70-250 or so. Stopped down it's fine, it just isn't sharp at 300 f5.6. I have one. It works. The VR is good. It will hunt in l,ow light, since f 5.6 is the baseline where AF starts to work. Faster is better.
That being said, if you can get the funds, the 80-200 2.8 AF-D is vastly superior. Far beter build (it's metal..) fast AF though it's not AF-S fast. It also suffers from not being overridable, it's either AF or manual. AF-S allows you to grab the focus ring and finetune. AF-D is noisy as well. Also yone notices a small "torque" sensation since the AF-D focuses the massive front elements whereas the AF-S focuses the rears which are much smaller. It definately does not suffer from bad optics, it's razor sharp throughtthe entire range. It's being discountinued. I have some stuff going upline that will demo teh strengths of this lens..( I hope..) The replacement is the 70-200 2.8 AF-S VR. NIIIICCCE! Costs twice as much. 80-200 can be had new for +- 900 out of NYC, on the used market you can get a good one for 600-700, again out of NYC.
I was also turned off by the ergonomics of the enrty Canon line. Some people also likethe nikon menus better. Look at them both in detail, and look at eh lens you think you want as well. One line will say BUY ME NOW!. hte down side of the nikon n\line if there is one, is thateh consumer lenses are just that. The 18-xx's AF-S DX G's feel cheap. I have come to really dislike the lack of a focus scale on my 18-135 DX. The 70-300 is a step up. The aperture ring omission on the G series is less of an issue for me, siince I have been spinnning dials since the days of the Canon A-1.
Lookin at online vendors? Look at B&H, Adorma, and Ritz. For used check out KEH. I can supply web addy's for all those after I get back on my own 'puter tomorrow night.