DSLRUsers.com

I was really, really hoping to get the Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-ED for my birthday in a few weeks, but unfortunately due to other financial commitments, this will not be the case and it is unrealistic to hope that I will get one at all in the near future.

Because I am not a professional photographer, I am now thinking of compromising my choice of lens to the Nikon 80-200 f2.8D AF instead because it is half the price, and I know it is something I will be able to afford. I would like some opinions as to whether this is a good decision. If I get this lens, it will be from Mr. Poon.

EDIT: I was just browsing on Maxwell's site - What about the Nikkor 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED?

Please give me some input as I would like to make a decision over the next week or so - this way I can receive the lens before my birthday and bring it with me to Sydney.

Cheers
Kristine

Have a read of Ken Rockwell's recommendations on lenses for digital. It goes into quite some details (his usual quirky opinions of course) about which lenses he recommends.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikkor.htm

Basically, he summed up that because of the availability and ease of high ISO settings on digital, it's quite pointless to spend big bucks on f/2.8 tele glass when the consumer grades will do adequately even under low light.
I'm not sure I agree with him on that point...

The 80-200 was my "dream lens" for quite a while. That was before having handled the 70-200. For my purposes, and I have slim chance of making money off this hobby, I deemed the VR, SWM and better optical performance of the 70-200 to be worth saving up for, even at twice the pricetag of the 80-200. When Nikon ruled the PJ market in the 90s, I can bet that nearly every photojournalist would have shot with one iteration of the 80-200 - so I guess today Nikon would have refined it to the point where it's near perfection.

I've handled and played with the 80-200 while I was in New York, and also a Tokina 80-200 out in the field when I met up with a fellow Nikon photographer. The Tokina is not worth considering at its price and lacklustre optics, so no more will be said. The lack of SWM on the Nikkor means it focuses quite slow, because the AF has to move all those heavy elements around. Handholding the lens, you could definitely "feel" the AF engage and move glass around. Optically it's fantastic and hard to fault, and the weight wasn't an issue for me as I thought it fitted/balanced nicely on the D70. I was disappointed with its closest focussing of 6ft min distance.

I had considered getting the 28-200G myself, using it strictly to compliment the kit lens (and not to replace it), having seen the MTF charts it seems to perform very well at the long end (wide end performance leaves a little to be desired). I have not read one bad review of this lens yet - however keeping in mind its intended buyers, their expectations and what the reviewers would be comparing it to. The only issue is the plastic lens mount, which are very rare these days on Nikkor's lens lineup (but common among consumer grade Canon and other cheap 3rd party trash). This lens would have been strictly a stepping stone for the better f/2.8 glass as and when I could afford them.
I've tried this out versus the 70-300D. It was absolutely no contest. If not for the extra reach of the -300, the 28-200 is superior in every way it counts. Chromatic abberation is my pet peave, and the 28-200 clearly controls this aspect much better than the 70-300ED. There was also noticeable difference in contrast and colour rendition throughout the zoom range, in favour of the 28-200G. At the moment I'm keeping an eye on that famous auction site with 1 is available at $AU330 plus postage (HK seller), great value IMHO.

Kristine,
The 80-200 AF or 80-200/ 2.8 AFS was once of my choice 4 years ago when the 70-200VR wasn't exist. I sold it at give away price to my friend and went for the 70-200VR.
I like the 80-200/ 2.8 AFS very much, and in comparison with the 70-200VR, you won't see much difference in quality, the 70-200VR is G.
I have the 28-200 D and 28-200G, first i thought it will be my walkabout lens, but very disappointed after acquired, its bokeh is not right, unsuable under low light and they're not sharp as I expected, get rid of them and gone for the 24-120VR, be happy now.
Go back to your lust, I think you may save up for the 70-200VR, I knew it's expensive but not one other glass in its range can pass its line. I have it for than 12 months and use it extensively in many events, day, night, on the helo or fixed wing aircraft. The return is non comparison.
Well I remembered you've just got the Man 190 tripod, it's not match and won't stand and sturdy with the 80-200 or 70-200VR, beware of it if you're going to get the 80-200, there'll be another lust after the 80-200, definetly the tripod and ball head so sum up and finally there's your choice and decision

Kristine, don't rule out second hand, I lust for the 70-200 but in the meantime purchased a 80-200 for $600, if I am ever lucky enough to upgrade to the 70 - 200 I should have no problem getting my money back. I would say the 28-200 really is designed for different purposes, for me it struck me as a great travel lens whilst the other two I view as the lenses I would use on photography days (and days I was fresh enough to carry 1.5kg of lens around)

Glen, where did you manage to find a 80-200 for $600? I wouldn't mind one at that price myself!

Onyx, diligent watching of Ebay, Trading post, http://www.photoimaging.com.au, http://www.buy-n-shoot.com. If we find a low mileage 70-200VR for $1500 you can have my 80-200 for $600. Seriously, I look around a bit, so if I see anything of interest to you I will PM you

$1500 with warranty?
You can buy the 70-200 overseas for that price from what i've seen, but I haven't factored shipping and possible taxes into the equation. The only problem I can see is that your warranty would be either in another country or void..

Which I guess could be a bit of an issue on a fifteen hundred dollar piece of glass..

H'mm - interesting discussion

cheers

Graham

PlatinumWeaver

$1500 with warranty?
You can buy the 70-200 overseas for that price from what i've seen, but I haven't factored shipping and possible taxes into the equation. The only problem I can see is that your warranty would be either in another country or void..

Hi,
Where can u buy the 70-200VR overseas at AU$1500.00? I'm interesting in it, and happy add on GST + freight.

Glen wrote:Onyx, diligent watching of Ebay, Trading post, http://www.photoimaging.com.au, http://www.buy-n-shoot.com. If we find a low mileage 70-200VR for $1500 you can have my 80-200 for $600. Seriously, I look around a bit, so if I see anything of interest to you I will PM you

Thanks Glen. I look around Ebay and Photoimaging sites too - but never seem to catch these "bargains"!

http://www.digitalfotoclub.com/sc/from- ... 8014&rf=dt
1,438.85 USD = 1,870.72 AUD

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi ... 71966&rd=1
1,275.00 USB = 1,657.69 AUD

I'm positive I found another place with a really good price.. but I cant find the link!

PlatinumWeaver,
The first link to digitalphotoclub.com is over AU$1870.00 + shipping and I believed they won't ship to Australia, I asked them before, but if they do ship by FedEx or DHL then at least US$100.00 and GST + Custom Clearnce fees add on to the original cost, final cost is over AU$2100.00

The second link is on eBay and it's at AU$1657.00 + S&H + GST + Customs clearance fees + it's on the bidding game.

So finally it'll be at least AU$2000.00 and used lens, if you can spot any 70-200VR at AU$1500.00 and you can buy and get it in your hand with your sastifactory less than AU$2000.00, even it's a used lens, and ship by Air to Australia then you're the number one lucky guy in the world

Having recently purchased the 80-200 f/2.8 a few months ago. I have to be honest i liked the old version with the push-pull zoom, really handy for use focus and zoom at the same time. But i reckon the af is a touch faster on the two-touch when i used the f5 a while back.

this driver was braking hard before slamming into the barriers

More mishaps

[/img]

I'm with Birddog, I think it is pretty hard to get a 70-200Vr into Aus at $1500.

Redline, I think the F5 has a faster and stronger focussing motor

I thought it was to do with teh AF sensors not the motor (ie we have a CAM900 while some others have a CAM1300 etc...)

MHD, I thought it was both

depends on if you are using AF-S lenses or not..

I thought (not an expert here) that the drive for an AF-S lens is in the lens.. and was activated using one of the contacts on the F mount

While a non AF-S lens uses a servo drive (in which case, yes having a torqier servo would be better!)

I know people say that the 70-300VR focuses faster on the D2H than on the D70 and I though that was due to the faster AF algorithums... and where the real money comes in is in the pedictive AF systems for moving targets!

MHD wrote:depends on if you are using AF-S lenses or not..

I thought (not an expert here) that the drive for an AF-S lens is in the lens.. and was activated using one of the contacts on the F mount

While a non AF-S lens uses a servo drive (in which case, yes having a torqier servo would be better!)

I know people say that the 70-300VR focuses faster on the D2H than on the D70 and I though that was due to the faster AF algorithums... and where the real money comes in is in the pedictive AF systems for moving targets!

MHD,
You're exactly right! the 70-200VR is focused faster on the D2h little bit slower on the D70 and D100 but you won't notice it, I have 3 bodies so I knew and make a comparison on them, but with only one body, you'll find the 70-200VR is far faster then the 80-200, and it's faster on the F5 same as the D2h

Glen, yeah i use f5 to compare focusing speeds on my lenses. some lenses may be really sluggish on old cameras but not as much on the f5.

I have an F5 also, my lenses all are AF-D/ AFS and AFS -VR, I can compare them easily and found the F5 does the job quite lot faster in focusing before I got the D2h.