80-200 F2.8 or 70-300VR?

Joined
May 13, 2007
Messages
990
Location
Cleveland, OH
I thought I was sold on the 70-300VR for an all-around telephoto lens, but I'm beginning to have second thoughts after having played with both the 80-200 F2.8 (the version right before the AF-S one) and the 70-300VR in a store.

Having not owned either lens, I can't say from experience that the faster glass would outweigh having the VR functionality. Any thoughts or opinions about these two lenses? The F2.8 would make for more dramatic, shallow depth-of-field pictures, but it also wouldn't be stabilized.

Thanks!
David
 
Joined
Apr 15, 2007
Messages
594
Location
Seattle
So what's your question? Different lenses for different purposes. Get both. I did. :biggrin:

I'm use the 70-300 for travel/hiking and the 80-200 for indoor/sports.
 
Joined
Feb 25, 2006
Messages
884
Location
NC
What do you need it for? The really are two completely different lenses with totally different purposes.
 
Joined
May 13, 2007
Messages
990
Location
Cleveland, OH
Pretty much anything. It would be the lens that extends my focal reach beyond 18-70mm that D70 is normally attached to.

I've not really owned any serious zoom lenses... just primes ... so I'm not really clear on what you mean when you say they have entirely different purposes.
 
Joined
Feb 25, 2006
Messages
884
Location
NC
I agree, go with the 70-300 first.

since you're a prime guy, maybe try out the Nikkor 180 f2.8.

Get the 70-200 / 80-200 if you find yourself shooting sports or portraits.
 
Joined
May 13, 2007
Messages
990
Location
Cleveland, OH
My biggest obstacle is that I shoot all different kinds of subject matter... portraits, landscapes, macro, wildlife, street candids, family stuff, etc. This lens would mainly be used for the wildlife but it would be nice to cover multiple bases with it as well.
 
Joined
May 13, 2007
Messages
990
Location
Cleveland, OH
since you're a prime guy, maybe try out the Nikkor 180 f2.8.
These seemed to have dried up on eBay. Affordably atleast... About 2 years ago, I saw one pop up for $160 buy it now. I missed it by about 30 seconds. Someone had snatched it about 10 minutes after it got posted.
 
Joined
Apr 6, 2007
Messages
59
Location
Minnesota
I am in the same position, trying to decide between a new 70-300VR and a used 80-200 2.8 and possibly a 1.4TC. My current set up is a D50, 18-70, and a 85 1.8. I am looking for a telephoto zoom to complete my kit. I am a not a pro-only recently gotten into the DSLR realm to shoot family events ,kids indoor and outdoor sporting events, and to do some wildlife. I was almost ready to pull the trigger on a 70-300Vr from B&H when I started to investigate the 80-200 2.8. I really like the images that my 85 1.8 gets me in low light and I am thinking the 80-200 may give similarly pleasing images. I know-I should quit looking at these forums and just buy one and go out and start shooting but I want to make the right decision!
 
N

nbmro

Guest
headgear, maybe this could help
after loooong comparisons on the internet, many reviews read and wandering many forums I finally bought the camera in my signature with the kit lens
from day two, I was again on the world wide web looking for a tele zoom (does this surprise you? :smile:)
at that moment, there weren't VR options for 55-200 or 70-300, and also I delayed my decision from other reasons.
I like very much the kit lens for landscapes outdoor shots in the daylight, but I can't forget that it is kinda slow.
so this was a problem to consider before buying the tele zoom.
in December I bought my second lens ever, nikkor 50/1.8. WOW, what possibilities opened up. I could take indoor photos of my little girl in the evening without using the flash, just upping the ISO.
so, in the spring, when I was again on the internet searching for the perfect tele - in the meantime, 70-300 vr and 55-200 vr were on the market - I already had fewer products to choose from. I mean only large aperture zooms. more expensive, but also more adequate for me.
I finally choose the sigma 70-200 for HSM and because it is regarded as one of the best sigma lenses. also, because it is roughly half the price of the nikkor 70-200 vr :smile:

so, start shooting, but look carefully for your next purchase. I hope my example can help you
good luck with your search!
 
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
43
Location
Orlando, FL
I've used both the 80-200 and the 70-300vr...before using the 70-300 I was sure that I needed/wanted the 80-200. After using the 70-300 vr for a few weeks I am going to buy it...a great all purpose lens. I have the 50 and 85 1.8 primes I can use indoors and for me the extra reach indoors hasn't been an issue yet. BTW I used the 70-200 vr for a week and if I could afford it I would probably get it...although it is a bit long and heavy for a walk around lens...having both the 70-300 and 70/80-200 would be great.
 
Joined
May 16, 2006
Messages
9,081
Location
Oregon
The 80-200 f2.8 will give you better family shots. The shallow depth of field will give you shots more "impact". A KenkoPro 1.4 works very well with the 80-200, while you lose a stop, you certianly don't lose any real world sharpness, color, or contrast.
 
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
4,519
Location
Suwanee, GA
Personally I'd go for pro quality glass and f/2.8 aperture over VR any day.
I'd have to agree with this...I"m seriously thinking about picking up the 80-200 (have a line on an AF-S model) and getting rid of my 70-300VR, or just keeping it for my wife.
 

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