80-200 f2.8

Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
5,985
Location
Orlando, Florida
I own the AF-D version of this lens that I bought used at Christmas time. I've been thinking about upgrading and have been considering the 70-200 but also the 80-200 AF-S. Recently, I realized that the AF-S version of the 80-200 isn't produced any longer.

This seems strange to me. Why would Nikon create an AF-S version of this lens, then stop making it and begin to offer only the AF-D version? Is the used AF-D version I currently have (2-ring) the same as the newest version?

What's up with that? ;)
 
Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
5,985
Location
Orlando, Florida
Paul, I noticed on that link you provided that it says the optics were improved. So I guess that indicates it is better than the previous AF-D version. So then I wonder if the current version has still the same optics as the AFS version or did they improve them once again. ??

I'm not convinced I need VR but maybe I'll borrow Gale's and see what it does. Saving a little bit of $ is always a good thing. Also I keep reading reports of poor performance of the 70-200 and D2X but don't know if that's just the minority speaking loudly. I'd rather have AF-S than not.
 
Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
5,985
Location
Orlando, Florida
ckdamascus said:
Many have argued that the AF-S is sharper than the original 80-200mm.

Well, that's encouraging! :D I've been very happy with the results of my 80-200. I have an opportunity to earn some extra $ shooting sports and now that I've had the chance to use an AF-S lens, I hate to think of "trying to manage" without the added speed. I think I'm becoming a focus snob now, if there is such a thing. :oops:

Anyway, you know what I mean. I appreciate eveyrone's feedback. It's great to have a resource such as this to bounce ideas.
 
Joined
May 14, 2005
Messages
928
Location
New Jersey
Well the idea of "sharper" isn't really all that important. The question is how much sharper and at what price.

http://www.camerahobby.com/Review-70-200mmVR.htm

He demonstrates that with a teleconverter the differences between the two are more apparent.

Honestly, it's pretty darn close that it would clearly be diminishing returns. Only you can guage if increased sharpness, faster AF, manual focus override, etc, is worth it. My only gripe about used lens have no warranty and will acquire internal dust over time which is basically impossible to clean out by yourself. Why pay so close to full price when you have those nasty disadvantages?

Also, the NEW 70-200mm VR supposedly is more susceptible to ghosting/flaring. Honestly, I don't see that as a major problem but at least you will have some solace in using the older 80-200mm AF-D lens.
 
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
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom