80-200 AF 2.8 lenses

jtoppingjtopping Posts: 8Member
edited May 2013 in Nikon Lenses
hi,
can i get some help and clarification regarding this lens? I'd like to get this lens used and i see so many listed but im not clear of the actual labeling and what the different lenses mean.

AF-s versus D, versus VR (which is vibration reduction right?) ED (is extra-low dispersion or the coating on the glass?)

I have a D200 and looking at getting a D7100 (both DX) and was wondering if which model of this lens (or any other telephoto 2.8 lens is a good mate for my gear.

Some of might recognize me from a thread about my D200 recently. (im going for both glass and new camera!!)

thanks

Comments

  • AdeAde Posts: 1,071Member
    From newest to oldest:

    80-200 AF-S (1999): superb optics (even by today's standards), fast, heavy, more expensive

    80-200 AF-D (1997): not as good wide open, but lighter, more compact, less expensive

    80-200 AF-D (1993): "push-pull" design, slow focusing

    None of the 80-200 versions had VR (only the 70-200 models have VR).

    If you can, get the AF-S version, or one of the 70-200s.
  • DXV_PhotoDXV_Photo Posts: 158Member
    If your sticking with DX you might want to consider looking at third party from Tamron and Sigma. Shooting DX you will be using only the center portion of the lens and corner performance will be less of an issue. Others on this forum have extensive experience from these manufactures and could recommend a good lens from them that would be a lot less then the nikon lens.
  • KillerbobKillerbob Posts: 732Member
    edited May 2013
    The Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC is affordable and verry good. Used it for years on my D7000. If it wasn't for the Nikon 80-400mm I just got, it would still be my go-to telezoom. Get the 2x TC as well. Even at 600mm this lens is acceptable.
    Post edited by Killerbob on
  • IronheartIronheart Posts: 3,017Moderator
    The Nikon 70-300 is $580 and is a great DX lens.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,006Member
    The Nikon 70-300 is $580 and is a great DX lens.
    Great FX lens too. ;)
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • sevencrossingsevencrossing Posts: 2,800Member
    if you are thinking of getting a telephone lens, unless you always use a tripod, or are able shoot at 1/ 1000 or higher. I feel VR is essential
  • GitzoGitzo Posts: 174Member
    First of all......if you have Nikon body that has an internal focusing motor, you can use the 80-200 D (which has no focusing motor built in; D-90 and up have an internal motor; the 80-200 AF-S model has the silent wave motor built in, so it can be used with bodies lacking a motor. Deciding which model to buy all depends on several things; which camera you have, if you shoot with a tripod (or other support), and how deep your pockets are.
    Having a lens with VR is great IF you shoot hand held a lot, however it will prevent you from going with the 80-200 /f2.8, either model of which is a VERY sharp lens, and being an older model, can be had used for a great price; the much newer 70-200/f2.8 AF-S VR is a much newer lens, is very sharp, somewhat lighter, and will cost you a LOT more money. I wouldn't recommend the older "push-pull" model from 1993. I have a 80-200 AF ED /f2.8D (without the motor) that I have been using for 12 or 13 yrs now, and I only gave like $500 for it way back then; IMO, it's about as much lens as you can get for that price; It's fairly heavy, as is the F5 body I used it with, but I use a tripod much of the time, so the weight is not a problem for me. Focuses quite fast, is very sharp, can be had cheap; ( I still use it with a D 300s body, which is much lighter than my F5 body. VR is nice to have if you shoot hand held, but with a tripod, you turn it off anyway, so why pay for it if you don't use it.
  • PhotobugPhotobug Posts: 4,603Member
    I had the 80-200mm AF-S lens for 5 years and loved it. It was an excellent lens. The guy that bought it from me actually came back via eBay and was delighted with the sharpness. Don't buy the older ones, especially the push-pull lens.

    I sold it and bought a Nikon 70-200mm F/2.8. It's even better, wish I would have done that sooner. It was worth the extra cost. Be patient in looking for used 80-200mm lens. The really clean ones don't come on eBay to often and when they do be prepared to big high.

    Good luck and stay with Nikon. I have too many friends that become satisfied with the sliding zoom collar. You walk around and when the lens points down the lens slides to 200mm. A pain in the neck.

    D750 & D7100 | 24-70 F2.8 G AF-S ED, 70-200 F2.8 AF VR, TC-14E III, TC-1.7EII, 35 F2 AF D, 50mm F1.8G, 105mm G AF-S VR | Backup & Wife's Gear: D5500 & Sony HX50V | 18-140 AF-S ED VR DX, 55-300 AF-S G VR DX |
    |SB-800, Amaran Halo LED Ring light | MB-D16 grip| Gitzo GT3541 + RRS BH-55LR, Gitzo GM2942 + Sirui L-10 | RRS gear | Lowepro, ThinkTank, & Hoodman gear | BosStrap | Vello Freewave Plus wireless Remote, Leica Lens Cleaning Cloth |
  • kyoshinikonkyoshinikon Posts: 410Member
    edited June 2013
    I have 3 80-200mm's a D200 and a D7000.(the push pull kind). You would be suprised how much faster it is on the D7000 than the D200. It is by no means a 70-200mm vr2 but on a D7000 or D7100 it focuses at an scceptable speed. Also it isn't too hard to find one for $400ish. The big downer for me is the lack of a tripod collar...
    Post edited by kyoshinikon on
    “To photograph is to hold one’s breath, when all faculties converge to capture fleeting reality. It’s at that precise moment that mastering an image becomes a great physical and intellectual joy.” - Bresson
  • MsmotoMsmoto Posts: 5,396Moderator
    @kyoshinikon

    Your 80-200 must be from the mid 1990's. I think the collar was added in the late 1990's. HAve you posted any images on APD with your 80-200?
    Msmoto, mod
  • kyoshinikonkyoshinikon Posts: 410Member
    I have but its been a while... I actually have 2 flavors of the push pull.
    “To photograph is to hold one’s breath, when all faculties converge to capture fleeting reality. It’s at that precise moment that mastering an image becomes a great physical and intellectual joy.” - Bresson
  • NizNiz Posts: 3Member
    edited June 2013
    Hey guys, I have a question for you about the 80-200 af-D lens. I am going to be looking at one tomorrow to buy from a guy of craigslist and wanted to get some thoughts on it. From the pictures he has sent me it looks in very good condition, no scratches on the front or rear element. The body of the lens looks very clean only some minor scuffs and one or two scratches on the lens hood. I have him willing to take $400 for it. Thats the part that I question, is that a good price for it? Also what the they things I should be looking at the lens to check out to make sure nothing is wrong with it?
    Post edited by Niz on
  • kyoshinikonkyoshinikon Posts: 410Member
    $400 is pretty good. $350 is hard to find but ideal. On ebay they can often go for as much as $600ish even tho $400 is common.Things to look out for...

    Loose screws in the front element. It is a dead giveaway that this is a dropped on cement lens. Make sure the pushpull mechanism goes smoothly at infinity in the middle and at the orange M (macro). Af is not lightning fast but at 1/4 cost of the new 70-200mm is is more than a steal. Test the focusing lock (on the older ones it is a mere switch on the left side by the front element on the later ones it is a ring. Check for t6he obvious as well (dents, scratches on glass, fungus, dirt, etc). Make sure there is no evidence of water damage under the push pull (i use mine in the rain unprotected and I doubt I am the only to do so)... Other than that it should be good. Make sure it fits on your camera well and that the mount isn't loose or brassing.
    “To photograph is to hold one’s breath, when all faculties converge to capture fleeting reality. It’s at that precise moment that mastering an image becomes a great physical and intellectual joy.” - Bresson
  • NizNiz Posts: 3Member
    Thanks @kyoshinkkon, those are a lot of good ideas to check for that I didn't think of. One thing to mention is that this isn't the push-pull lens, it is the newer two ring D lens. That is the biggest reason I was surprised about the price and wondering if it was too good to be true or maybe they don't know what they have.
  • kyoshinikonkyoshinikon Posts: 410Member
    Mo prob Niz. A non push pull easily could go for $800 so consider it a steal. It is not too good to be true but definitely a bargin. Often 80-200mm owners dont know what they have. Look for the above and also check that the rubber rings are still firm and not loose.
    “To photograph is to hold one’s breath, when all faculties converge to capture fleeting reality. It’s at that precise moment that mastering an image becomes a great physical and intellectual joy.” - Bresson
Sign In or Register to comment.