80-200 ED vs 70-200 VR? Worth the upgrade?

Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
50
Location
Lisbon / Portugal
Hello,
How are you?
I am facing a bit of a dilemma.
I currently have a mint 80-200 ED. The lens is very good and I like it very much.
I have the chance of buying a mint 70-200 VR I for a good price. I am thinking if it is worth the upgrade? Is the VR first generation good? Is the AF-S motor on the lens reliable? Is the IQ a step up? Or will it be practically the same? How about bokeh?

Did any of you did a similar upgrade? Do you regret it? Or was it a no-brainer?

Cheers and thanks!
 
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
138
Location
Germany
There are four different 80-200 2.8 Versions with AF out there.

Which is yours?
AF 80-200mm 2.8 ED (1 Ring Push-Pull)
AF-D 80-200mm 2.8 ED (1 Ring Push-Pull)
AF-D 80-200mm 2.8 ED (2 Ring)
AF-S 80-200mm 2.8 ED
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
50
Location
Lisbon / Portugal
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #4
There are four different 80-200 2.8 Versions with AF out there.

Which is yours?
AF 80-200mm 2.8 ED (1 Ring Push-Pull)
AF-D 80-200mm 2.8 ED (1 Ring Push-Pull)
AF-D 80-200mm 2.8 ED (2 Ring)
AF-S 80-200mm 2.8 ED
Hello,
My 80-200 is the AF Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 D ED.
The one that is screw-drive with 2 rings. I've added a picture of mine below.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Cheers!
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
2,476
Location
Lompoc, CA
I did a similar upgrade because I wanted VR. IMO, while there is an upgrade in IQ and bokeh, it isn't night and day. Put another way, while the 70-200 is a great lens, the 80-200 is also really good and I wouldn't spend the money on an upgrade unless I identified a specific weakness in it I though the 70-200 would address.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Jul 21, 2007
Messages
5,262
Location
NJ
If you have that much cash on hand and want to improve your lens line-up I think you'll get more bang for your buck by getting a 300/4 for instance.

The 80-200 is no slouch, personally I don't think VR offers that much benefits (but I use a tripod in many cases) and the main benefit of the 70-200 is AF acquisition speed. If that's worth the money for you go for it, otherwise I'd stick with the 80-200.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
50
Location
Lisbon / Portugal
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #9
Thank you all for the replies.
I am happy with my lens. AF speed is not a big issue to me. I do events, portraits and some general photography. I don't really do sports or fast paced action.
I am happy with the screw-drive AF. All my lenses are screw drive. I have the 50 1.4; 85 1.4; 20-35 and 80-200.
I enjoy the reliability iof AF-d lenses and the mechanical feel.
I would not think about this much, but I got offered the 70-200 for 800 euros in very good condition. 95% mint.
I guess if I could selly 80-200 for a good value, the upgrade would not be too costly. I just don't know if it is worth it from a practical standpoint.

Cheers and thank you for the input.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Jul 21, 2007
Messages
5,262
Location
NJ
I would not think about this much, but I got offers the 70-200 for 800 in very good condition. 95% mint.
If your 80-200 is in great condition than you can easily sell it for 600-800 (and it looks like it). Getting a like-new 70-200 for 800 makes upgrading a good deal.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
50
Location
Lisbon / Portugal
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #11
Ended up getting the 70-200. Now I have both and will be comparing them. :)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Cheers!
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
919
Location
Northern California
I had the exact 80-200 and upgraded to a 70-200 VRII. The IQ and bokeh was much better and I would be interested in your opinion with the VR I
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2009
Messages
818
Location
Texas!
Have the 70-200 VR1. Found that VR allows me to handhold @ 200mm @ 1/15 second with 80-90% keepers. VR off, 10 of 10 @ the same shutter speed were blurred. The blur was directional. This = camera motion during exposure. My subject was static (a light switch), so I know the movement was me. VRII may be even better, but VR1 works.
 
Joined
May 29, 2013
Messages
28
Location
L.A.
Over the years, I've had the 80-200 AF-D, the two-ring version, the 80-200 AF-S, the 70-200 VR1 and now the 70-200 VR2---ALL were very good and I could still use any of them today on my two current bodies (D300 and D7100). I do find the VR lenses more useful in low-light conditions---so good they are almost like witchcraft in their ability to grap good shots at live music events---I would upgrade just to get the VR. If you were wondering, I managed to sell the previous versions for very good money, and paid little more out of my pocket on each upgrade...
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2009
Messages
4,380
Location
Toronto
I had long yearned for a 70-200 2.8 VRII but couldn't justify the cost for the amount that I would use it. I bought a gently used copy of the 80-200 that you have and have been delighted with it. When I need it, it never fails me...bokeh and IQ are outstanding in my opinion. And when it sits for weeks at a time it doesn't bother me because I didn't pay $2000 for it.
 
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