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!

trade an 18-200vr for a 80-200 2.8?

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by big_jon, Jul 25, 2007.

  1. big_jon


    Jul 14, 2007
    It seems everyday i have a wierd question to ask LOL.

    Have just been offered a trade (no top-up etc), my new 18-200VR that i have used for less than 4 months and is still under warranty, in exchange for an 80-200 2.8 (two ring non-afs version) that is in excellent condition except for a crack in the a/m switch. age of the unit cannot be determined as the guy bought it used.

    I actually wouldn't mind, but seem to wary that the guy has been trying to sell it for USD600 but no one wants to buy. normally doesnt this sell for USD1000+ brand new? What worrys me most is that i would be trading something new for something old.

    I tried a new one at the shop whilst buying my 105VR and really liked it, but it was out of my budget so i walked out with the 105VR thinking it would cover most of my telephoto needs whilst opening up the world of macro for me.

    Now i get this offer and it just makes me wonder, instead of getting a 17-55DX, would the combo of
    12-24 (yet to own, looking for cheap used tokina),
    50 1.8 for midrange,
    105VR for macro and portrait
    80-200 2.8 for telephoto work well?

    just need to ask some questions about the 80-200 2.8:

    1. What should i worry about considering that this could be for all i know 10 years old even though it is excellent condition?

    2. what are the negative points of the 80-200?

    3. How much better is the IQ over the 18-200?

  2. 1. Get the serial number on the lens to start with. There's a web site where you can find out the year it was manufactured. It's in New Zealand or Australia I believe - google it.

    2. I had this lens (bought new one) in January. Mine was backfocusing on my D200. Traded it in towards the 70-200VR & didn't looked back. Past that I really like the lens. High IQ - nice lens. I just wish it had focused where it was supposed to on my camera.

    3. Now I've not owned the 18-200, but I've played with it on the D200. The 80-200 has far faster & higher IQ. It's also a lot sharper. I consider the 18-200 a travel lens, the 80-200 you can do a lot more with & get far higher quality shots.


  3. mood


    Jun 27, 2007
    So Fla
    the 80-200 is superior to the 18-200 is every way other than size/ weight
    I'm not sure how much that cracked switch bothers/ affects the lens operation or you,
    I would make the deal, unless you crave the versatility of the 18-200
  4. thebac


    Jul 23, 2007
    I'd pass,...

    The 80-200 f/2.8 is a far superior lens to the 18-200 in optical quality. That's not surprising given each of their target markets and specs.

    Now what I'm saying is entirely US-centric, and the situation in Malaysia might be different, but:

    The new price of the 80-200 is less than $900 new from reputable stores (B&H sells it for $869, and the import version for $799), and it's a lens that frequently gets a $50 mail-in rebate. The 18-200 sells for a little less than that new at B&H, but due to the shortage, realistically, it sells for a bit more at stores where you can actually buy it.

    Thus, the used value of an 18-200 is actually a bit higher than that of an 80-200 right now. Add to that the fact that yours is a fairly new lens, and his is one of unknown age (though it can't be THAT old), with a defect to boot (even though the A/M switch issue is well known and quite frequent, it'll still cost you to have it fixed).

    In the US, you should be able to net about $650 from the sale of the 18-200, while a good condition used 80-200 should be $600-$650--by good condition, I mean some wear on the lens body, not scratches on the glass or broken A/M switches.

    I don't know how market conditions in Malaysia might differ, but with the cracked A/M switch (assuming there are no other defects), this is no even trade.

    You're being shortchanged at least $200 here, probably more (again, based on US new and used prices). If he had a near mint copy with no defects and complete with all accessories and matched hood, I'd consider the trade, but not as it stands.

    I'm not surprised he was unable to sell it for $600. Conversely, you could easily get more than $650 if you were to sell the 18-200. Doesn't that tell you something about the value of each lens (taking into account condition)?
  5. Doug


    Jan 17, 2006
    East TN
    I would pass on the trade for anything broken. Sell yours outright, then find GOOD glass.
  6. Nuteshack

    Nuteshack Guest

    what Doug said ....;-))
  7. big_jon


    Jul 14, 2007
    thanks for the answers guys, probably was greedy for cheap glass, as i see it now its a toss up between a new local 12-24DX or a new import 17-55DX... was just browsing through my pics last night and i noticed 80% are at 18mm :biggrin:
  8. MD2595


    Jul 6, 2007
    Fort Worth, TX
    I've got both, and they are both excellent lenses. The 80-200 f2.8 was my very first lens purchase because I was too cheap to get the 70-200 VR lens.

    I've never been disappointed with the 80-200, I've gotten some VERY good shots of my son's PeeWee hockey team with that lens.

  9. chrisnck


    Jul 19, 2007
    I would go for the 80-200 great lens
  10. nykonian


    May 4, 2007
    New York
    As many have said, 80-200mm is a professional lens and superior to 18-200mm optically. That being said, 18-200mm is very capable and compact enough to take it everywhere. I recently sold my 80-200mm 'cause of its bulky size and hefty weight.

    Here's a handheld snapshot from 80-200mm at 200mm wide-open:
  11. bender73

    bender73 Guest

    i also just sold my 80-200 for its bulky size and hefty weight.

    maybe i am a pretty decent photographer for a NooB to SLR, but i get some quality shots with "consumer" lenses. i just don't see IQ so superior to justify the price tags of some of these lenses out there. i have more fun shooting with my 70-300 VR AF-S than i did with the slooow AF-D 80-200.

    my 2 cents for what it's worth.

    maybe if i had a 70-200 AF-S VR then my opinion would be different...it likely would, except for the weight/bulk part.
  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.