Difference between 180/2.8 old and new?

Joined
Oct 3, 2006
Messages
49
Hello folks. I have been reading this forum for about a year, but rarely posting. My dilemna is this. I am going to buy a used 180/2.8. I can get the newer version (with the crinkle finish and wider focus ring) for about $100more than the older, slick version. For someone who is not horribly rough on their equipment, is the difference worth it? As I understand it, the $100 may buy me better build quality, but the optics are the same, correct?

Thanks in advance for any help.
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2005
Messages
1,011
Location
San Jose, CA
I can get the newer version (with the crinkle finish and wider focus ring) for about $100more than the older, slick version. For someone who is not horribly rough on their equipment, is the difference worth it?
I'd spend the extra $100. I checked out both versions in a store before I bought, and the crinkle finish felt $1,000 better in my hands than the plastic finish version.

Edit: I checked out the posting on the For Sale forum. $450 for the newest (D) version is an excellent price. I hope your bid was successful!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Nov 1, 2007
Messages
539
Location
Virginia
I have the old version, and like it quite well. It doesn't feel flimsy to me, and the narrow MF ring doesn't bother me in the least, as I don't MF with it anyway.
 
Joined
Oct 3, 2006
Messages
49
Yes, FJG thanks for the link. Always good to have as much information as you can.

And yes Uncle Frank, we are pending on the one on the for sale forum. Fortuitous timing, as it pretty much splits the difference between the two.
 
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
4,519
Location
Suwanee, GA
The 180 is on it's way to Dan...I hope he uses it more than I did. I did like the lens, but always found myself reaching for the 80-200 more than the 180. Good luck Dan!
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2006
Messages
7,892
Location
East TN
I think the smooth version is fine, neither lens will survive being air dropped. I paid like 400ish for mine, a smoothie, I hardly think I'm hurting on it, and it takes the same images (amazing I might add). Nute, where's those pics my 180 took? hehe. So, agreed Jason, smart buyer saves the 100.00 and invests it in other glass, like filters. I think most high quality image producing 180 telephotos will bring 400 any day of the week. :)
 
Joined
Aug 9, 2007
Messages
247
Location
SP-Brasil
Just one shot with Nikon ED 180 2.8 (non D version) lens wide open. This is Zen, my best friend. Grate lens!
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Joined
May 6, 2005
Messages
5,482
Location
NY
I think the smooth version is fine, neither lens will survive being air dropped. I paid like 400ish for mine, a smoothie, I hardly think I'm hurting on it, and it takes the same images (amazing I might add). Nute, where's those pics my 180 took? hehe. So, agreed Jason, smart buyer saves the 100.00 and invests it in other glass, like filters. I think most high quality image producing 180 telephotos will bring 400 any day of the week. :)
Hey Doug,

I'm not so sure about that. I think my current original version 180 was air dropped, or perhaps rolled over by a tank. :biggrin:

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

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

f/2.8 100% crop field test shot from the Beater.

After selling my spiffy crinkle-finished non-D version to Uncle Frank, I picked up this original version. Before the crinkled non-D, I owned a crinkled D.
In my experience, all three lenses are equals in image quality, though the crinkleds certainly look better and have the wider rubber manual focus ring.
It's just a great lens, regardless of the version.

My only wish for this lens is an infusion of AF-S. I'm still waiting to hear whether the D3/D300 AF motor makes my wish unnecessary.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom