DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> AF Zoom Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8D ED Autofocus Lens
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 18 of 18, (reverse)
AuthorThread
11/10/2004 09:35:36 PM · #1
Anyone have this lens? What are your feelings on it? I am interested in this lens and can purchase it new for $699.00 after a $200.00 rebate. This one is not the AF-S.

Should I consider spending the extra money on the AF-S used at about $1100.00. Also you can find the older model with the push pull type lens that does not have the tripod collar for about $500 on ebay. I was also looking into the 80-400 AF-S VR which runs about $1400. new and used for about $1100.
11/10/2004 11:18:56 PM · #2
I don't have it, but i hear this is one of the best pieces of glass Nikon has ever produced. People that can't afford the newer VR 70-200/2.8 version are usually advised to get the 80-200 for one third the price. Ken Rockwell (kenrockwell.com) also recommends not to ever get one w/o the tripod collar, because it's pretty heavy.
11/10/2004 11:29:09 PM · #3
Yura is exactly right. the VR version is outstanding (and worth every penny IMO), but it's little brother is great too. I've used both, and both are very very sharp. the VR might be a little faster, and it forgives about 2 stops of camera shake.

i tried the 80-400, and it's very sharp, but it's slow (slower than other F4s that I've used). if your light is good and you need the reach of a 400mm, you can't beat it.

the 1.4x teleconverter with the F2.8 70-200mm is a nice compromise, for a little less money.
11/10/2004 11:30:11 PM · #4
Originally posted by BADDBOYY21:

Anyone have this lens? What are your feelings on it? I am interested in this lens and can purchase it new for $699.00 after a $200.00 rebate. This one is not the AF-S.

Should I consider spending the extra money on the AF-S used at about $1100.00. Also you can find the older model with the push pull type lens that does not have the tripod collar for about $500 on ebay. I was also looking into the 80-400 AF-S VR which runs about $1400. new and used for about $1100.


Get either the 70-200 AF-S 2.8 from last year ~$1200, or the 80-200 AF-S VR 2.8 ~$1400. Trust me at 300mm (1.5x), you need the faster aperture. Avoid the f4+ lenses at all cost. You will need to shoot at a shutter speed of 1/400th on the non-vr or 1/100th on the vr. With the 80-400 you'll be pushing 1600 iso in no time flat to get up to 1/200th for a steady shot.

I have the 80-200 AF-S VR 2.8 and it has been my main lens since its introduction. I love it. Buy a teleconverter if you need to hit 400mm (600mm 1.5x). You will drop down to f5.6 but at least you will have a very fast 200mm (300mm 1.5x) for 90% of your shots.

Adam

Message edited by author 2004-11-11 00:40:46.
11/11/2004 12:17:15 AM · #5
I have the Nikkor 80-200mm f2.8 ED it's a great lens it really is I cannot comment about the others because I have never tried them. I find the 80-200ED very sharp throughout and a great lens to have in any collection it is definately one of my NO SELL lenses thats for sure.

Its alway best to tripod these heavey lenses but i find i can shoot handheld with it too and get great results, if you wish i can put a 'STRAIGHT FROM CAMERA' pic up for you to see with the settings list.

I guess the extra $$s means extra lens and Nikkor make wonderfull glass the Ken Rockwell review says it all so if you can afford the extra get it i say.
11/11/2004 02:00:08 AM · #6
Ken Rockwell likes it! Praises it very highly for someone with years of experience!
Didn't see that Yura had mentioned it, but here is the exact link.

Message edited by author 2004-11-11 02:01:14.
11/11/2004 02:21:48 AM · #7
does someone want to tell me what IMO means?
11/11/2004 02:22:28 AM · #8
nevermind (in my opinion)

Message edited by author 2004-11-11 02:27:43.
11/11/2004 03:49:13 AM · #9
Originally posted by BADDBOYY21:

Anyone have this lens? What are your feelings on it? I am interested in this lens and can purchase it new for $699.00 after a $200.00 rebate. This one is not the AF-S.

I haven't got so much experience with other lenses, but I got the AF-D version of this one as my "oh-I-found-the-money-and-went-for-it-lens". I'm just *so* happy with it.

For me it's really fast - it kinda "throws" the focus in there for you and the images comes out very sharp if you can avoid camera shake. I couldn't afford the VR-variant, but thanks to the VR's existance (ppl upgrading) I think you can find a used one pretty cheap and in mint condition.

In the below gallery, I have taken the two seagull images by hand with this lens. All the snooker images (very poor lightning conditions and pretty far off) with a tripod and the "birdie nam nam" is one sharp out of a series of like 10 handheld at a very long distance. I'm no master at this, but I sometimes feel that this lense takes good pictures on my behalf.

Gallery with Nikkor 80-200 images

Edit: I use it for "macro" photography too. The champagne.jpg is with this lense, as is the colorized-cable and well, the "stockholm sunset" too.. My latest challenge entry - "Braindamage 24%" is with this lens too..

Message edited by author 2004-11-11 03:51:28.
11/11/2004 02:10:05 PM · #10
I have owned 3 different versions of this lens starting with the orignal which had just one ring for focusing & zooming. Although I will agree with some of my fellow D70 users that it IS a really sharp lens, I do feel that it is over rated and not a very useful multipurpose lens. For starters it is a tank. Weighing in at about 3lbs it handles like it weighs twice that. The balance when connected to th D70 is very front heavy. I realize that this has more to do with the D70 being a feather weight, but since we are talking about this lens on this camera it should be noted.
Also the lens is known for being quite soft at the edges when focused close. Not as a big a deal on the D70 with its smaller sensor, but comes into play if you use on a 35mm camera or get a full frame Nikon mount digital down the road.
Don't get me wrong it is a great lens, but I just felt that the negatives should be brought up since the positives were already covered.
Try the 70-210 f4 (ebay about $150-200). It is as sharp, won't break your back or your wallet.
11/11/2004 02:49:57 PM · #11
Can somebody comment on the effect VR has on battery life? Is it a significant drain? I've been debating between the VR/nonVR versions of this lens for a while now. Thanks!

Message edited by author 2004-11-11 14:50:50.
11/11/2004 02:54:36 PM · #12
I still get between 750 and 1000 shots (some with flash) even with the VR on full-time. a non-issue pretty much.
11/11/2004 03:04:52 PM · #13
Originally posted by joebok:

Can somebody comment on the effect VR has on battery life? Is it a significant drain? I've been debating between the VR/nonVR versions of this lens for a while now. Thanks!


D70 specific answer. I can get almost 800 shots in raw (8 sandisc extreme 1gb cf cards full) out of one D70 battery on the 80-200 2.8. With the 70-200 vr 2.8 I get under 500 shots raw, about 480. This is with the LCD off with both lenses, and focus range limiter on on the vr. In both cases this is over about 4 hours of shooting. I am sure that with a greater burst rate closer together I could squeeze 50 more shots out of one batt. The Vr is worth the money. you can move from shooting 1/400th hand held to 1/100th both at 300 mm 1.5x conversion.

Adam

Message edited by author 2004-11-11 15:12:35.
11/11/2004 03:56:44 PM · #14
z

Message edited by author 2005-07-11 21:33:28.
11/11/2004 04:01:26 PM · #15
Thanks for the insight on the battery - looks like the consensus is that it really should not be much of a factor in deciding. Thanks!
12/09/2004 10:47:31 PM · #16
Hello, Does anybody have the user manual for this lens ? I just got one in seconds, but am not able to get going with its autofocus. Can you please help ?
12/09/2004 10:50:22 PM · #17
Originally posted by floatingcreeper:

Hello, Does anybody have the user manual for this lens ? I just got one in seconds, but am not able to get going with its autofocus. Can you please help ?


Must be a problem with the lens if it won't autofocus. A manual will do you no good.
12/09/2004 11:02:14 PM · #18
I've used the 80-200 a few times now and do miss the AF-S speed that my kit lens gives me. Its a nice lens though.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 12/05/2020 07:23:55 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2020 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 12/05/2020 07:23:55 AM EST.