80-200 2.8 or 70-300 vr

Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
167
Location
Southern California
For outdoor sports shooting (good light) which do you recommend? I figure a used two-ring vs. a new vr would be close to the same price. I'm shooting on a D300.
 
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
2,398
Location
Missouri
If you have enough light the 70-300VR will focus a bit faster, but you need a lot of light to stop action or shoot at higher ISO with its smaller maximum aperture.
The 80-200 is still selling well on ebay for used. They are fetching around $650 or more. The 70-300VR can be had for $409-459 brand new. I paid less and got a nice lightly used one.
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
4,886
Location
Valley Forge, PA
I would personally go for image quality over reach in this situation. I had an 80-200 (non-AF-S) and it was razor sharp. Image quality is on par with the 70-200 IMO and for the money, it is a bargain.
 
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
301
Location
SF Bay Area
Go with speed: 80-200 2.8, you already have a 18-200.
Need more reach? Slap on a TC for your 80-200.
 
Joined
Aug 14, 2007
Messages
48
Location
GTA, Ontario, Canada
I echo the above sentiments.
I've used both lenses, and while the 70-300 VR is a great lens, the optical quality of the 80-200 is far superior. You can get a used two ring version for a (relatively) reasonable price.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom