1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

80-200 AF-S over 80-200 AF-D?

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by icecavern, Jul 1, 2007.

  1. Right I have been offered an 80-200 AF-S at what I consider to be a good price. It's a sharp copy for sure.

    So I'm wondering if anyone else traded up from an AF-D to an AF-S and why etc?

    I'm tempted for the focusing speed, but will I be loosing anything? I really love my AF-D, and it's the lens kept on the camera in the bag as it's used so much.

  2. Nope... But you will get a faster focusing lens that is slightly heavier & larger... Just be sure that its as sharp as yours... If you don't need the extra speed of the AF-S, I'd keep the AF-D lens... Just my preference...
  3. Tosh


    May 6, 2005
    The AF-S version will also mate with the better and more modern Nikon TC-14e, -17e and -20e.
    One possible negative is that it's an older lens no longer in production and some day parts might become a problem if repairs are needed.
    For that reason, I switched to a 70-200vr during the last round of Nikon rebates.
  4. Except for the extra weight the AFS is better all the way around. Sharper, faster, removable tripod collar, focus lock buttons, etc. Then you can trade that up to the 70-200VR.
  5. If you plan on putting on a teleconvertor, I would recommend the Af-s, the TC14e works amazing on it.
  6. tojor


    Jul 27, 2005
    I would trade but I'm not satishfied with my AF-D. I'll buy it. :smile:
  7. I've had three versions...push-pull, two-ring, and now AF-S. The AF-S is noticably sharper from f2.8-f4, (at least my copy is); not that the other two were poor by any means. The AF-S is very much faster to focus, and much better with the tc-14eII than the others were with the Kenko Pro 1.4 or the TC-14b. I would make the switch if any of those things are critical to your application; if not then I'd stick with your current lens.
  8. The TC issue is a valid point and a good option. If you got the 1.4tc you could probably sell off the 300f4. But it you are thinking about changing things around, another option might be to pick up a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 and the Sigma 1.4tc that you could also use with your 300 f2.8

    But I have had both the 80-200 AF-D and the 70-200 AF-S. I've used them on a D70 and D200. The 70-200 was faster on the D70 and probably a little faster on the D200 as well. But how much faster on a D2x? I would have to think the difference would be even less as strong as the D2x is.
  9. Thanks all. I've not decided what do do with the 80-200 as yet, I'm tempted to stick with the AF-D and maybe trade up to the 70-200VR later.

    David, your point about the Sigma 70-200 is a good one. After playing with the 300 today I do plan to get the sigma 1.4tc to go with it.
  10. plim

    plim Guest

    well, from one pete to another, the ultimate goal should be the 70-200mm vr.

    but i think a layover at the 80-200mm af-s wouldn't be so bad. some people think the af-s is actually slightly sharper than the 70-200mm vr. go figure =P

    if you have the cash, and find one at a good price, i don't see why you wouldn't do it.
  11. Nchesher


    Jul 7, 2006
    I've never used the AF-D but my AF-S is wickedly sharp. When I looked at my first images shot a F2.8 I was amazed.
  12. Tosh


    May 6, 2005
    I've had the 80-200 AF-D and AF-S, 3 70-200vr's, and a Sigma 70-200 2.8. The 80-200 AF-S, along with my last copy of the 70-200vr (now Donzo's), were the two sharpest wide open. I believe there is some sample variation that leads to differing opinions as to which model is sharpest. Luckily, none of these models are dull.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.