| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Nikon lenses - really whats the difference
Patrick McPartland, Photographer
 |
Buffalo | NY | USA | Posted: 8:53 PM on 01.26.11 |
->> I need to buy a new zoom lens. Can anyone give an answer why I should spend $1000 dollars more on the Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Lens over the AF Zoom-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED Lens.
Any advice is helpful. Thanks. |
|
Michael Chang, Photographer
|
Robertsdale | AL | USA | Posted: 8:57 PM on 01.26.11 |
->> Newer technology (zoom, VR, etc). May want to check out the 70-200 VR 1 lens.
However the 80-200 is still a very nice lens. |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 9:08 PM on 01.26.11 |
->> Patrick which bodies are you wanting to use the AF on? Many of the newer consumer bodies will only auto focus AF-s glass. If you are planning to do video make sure that the AF version is supported by the body you have/want.
AF-s will focus faster than AF because the body isn't having to move a focus screw and all that glass.
The newer glass will have better coatings, better battery performance for your bodies, longer service life.
A big part of the consideration would be what you primarily shoot. |
|
Patrick McPartland, Photographer
|
Buffalo | NY | USA | Posted: 9:18 PM on 01.26.11 |
->> Shooting sports mainly. All these comments are very helpful. Exactly what I am looking for. My old 80-200 lasted 16 years. I figure the new VR will be just as tough, but I wanted to ask people who have used in the field. The battery life info is a real help.
Right now I'm using a D3 and my backup D200. If the president sees fit to give me money back on my taxes I may invest in a D3s. |
|
Andrew Carpenean, Photographer
|
Laramie | WY | USA | Posted: 10:05 PM on 01.26.11 |
->> Patrick,
There is a 100% tax deduction for business related equipment in 2011. And watch for sales promotions through B&H Photo at the end of the year. At the end of 2010 if you were to purchase a D3s, D700 or D300s, added to your cart with a 70-200 f2.8 VR II there was a $400 discount toward your purchase. For the 24-70 f2.8 it was $300.
I've only shot with the VR I 70-200 and its a good lens for sure, but from the images I've seen taken with the VR II its a huge difference in color contrast and sharpness. The nano crystal coated lens elements is what does it. |
|
Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
 |
Los Angeles | CA | | Posted: 1:24 AM on 01.27.11 |
->> Been shooting with the new 70-200 2.8 VR II for about a month or so. My thoughts at this moment:
It is a major improvement over the lens it replaces. The 70-200 VR II is noticeably faster (maybe 1/4 of a stop), the vignetting is not pronounced, the stabilizer is improved, it focuses closer and in very low-light situations it seems to acquire focus more consistently and hangs on (in other words very little "hunting").
As with most Nikon glass, this lens is extremely sharp.
As with all technology newer products will usually be an improvement on what it replaces. And this is certainly the case with the 70-200 2.8 VR II. |
|
Doug Holleman, Photographer
|
Temple | TX | USA | Posted: 1:39 AM on 01.27.11 |
->> A year ago I chose to go with the 80-200 AF-D, largely based on Ken Rockwell's review (I know, I know...), and my budget, being about $800 less. However, if I had it to do all over again I would have got for the AF-S. The AF-D has let me down with sub-par focus at times, and it seems to get kinda fogged up easily and has a bit of haze in certain light, which I just can't seem to get rid of. When it's sharp it's really sharp. But with a lot of action stuff on a D300 focusing has been really disappointing at times, especially night stuff. It's really hit and miss. I've wanted to throw it up against a wall a couple of times.
Or I wouldn't buy a zoom at all. The extra weight on the shoulder on a second camera is killer on my creaky old bones, and I'm still not a big fan of zooms. But I never could afford any of the really good ones. |
|
Kevin Batchelor, Photographer
|
Southampton | Hampshire | England | Posted: 3:16 AM on 01.27.11 |
| ->> Had both lenses there is no comparrison the vr11 is faster on focus, sharper and just better all round for sports. It's expensive but well worth it. You will be pleased with the results of both but the Vr11 will get the shot the 80 -200 misses because it's still searching for the subject |
|
Andrew Malana, Photographer
|
San Diego/Tokyo | CA | USA | Posted: 4:24 AM on 01.27.11 |
->> Just to add...If you are considering joining NPS, the 80-200 is NOT the 'list'.
70-200MM F/2.8G ED VR AF-S ZOOM-NIKKOR
70-200MM F/2.8G ED VR II AF-S NIKKOR
These flavors of 70-200's are...currently.
If you are already a member of NPS, then this is post is moot. |
|
Ed Wolfstein, Photographer, Assistant
 |
Burlington | VT | USA | Posted: 9:01 AM on 01.27.11 |
->> The AF-S Nikkors are all faster focusing and more responsive to other software commands (lock-on, etc.) than the original AF Nikkor lenses. The reason: they all contain a "Silent-Wave" motor within the lens designed specifically to move the optics of that particular lens. The older AF Nikkor lenses relied on a motor in the camera body and a cam to mechanically focus the lens. This wasn't the most efficient of designs. It also meant that a zoom lens (with lots of elements to move around in AF) would rely on that motor and cam mechanism, the same way a fixed 50mm lens would. The 50 might be perky, but the zoom would be sluggish by comparison. I've used an 85mm AF Nikkor since the days of my F4, and recently updated to the new AF-S version, and have been very happy with its tracking ability and ultra-fast lock-on using todays' bodies. Optically, perhaps newer lenses have some improvement (nano crystals, etc. - I don't split hairs on that), but for sports, and indoor sports with available light, AF-S in the way to go. My 2 cents.
Cheers!
- Ed. |
|
Gavin Werbeloff, Photographer
|
San Francisco | CA | USA | Posted: 9:18 AM on 01.27.11 |
| ->> If the price is a strong consideration, look at picking up a used 80-200 2.8 AF-S. For shooting on a full frame camera, there are many who believe that it is better than the 70-200 2.8 VR (first gen). I have one, and I like it so much, I really can't justify spending the money on the VR II. |
|
Michael Clark, Photographer
|
Santa Fe | NM | USA | Posted: 11:58 AM on 01.27.11 |
| ->> The 70-200mm versions are way sharper than the old 80-200. And if you shoot full-frame then you'll get a lot less vignetting with the new II version. I had the old 80-200 and it was ok with film but I quickly found it wasn't up to par on my DSLRs. And the VR is key too for these new high MP cameras. |
|
Caleb Raney, Photographer, Assistant
|
Tecumseh | Ok | USA | Posted: 4:49 PM on 01.27.11 |
->> I'd like to add a cautionary tale. I purchased a Canon 28-70 f2.8 instead of the newer 24-70 f2.8 at what I thought was a significant savings. I was very happy with it, fast, sharp, ect. At the time I was unaware that it is nearly impossible to get a discontinued lens serviced, or find repair parts. Without the wizardry of Mark at Mid-State I would have ended up with a quite expensive paperweight.
Just my $.02 |
|
Patrick McPartland, Photographer
|
Buffalo | NY | USA | Posted: 7:10 PM on 01.27.11 |
| ->> Thank you all!! I'm sold. Will do. Look for some shots to be posted after I get it. |
|
Aleksi Lepisto, Photographer
|
Port Angeles | WA | United States | Posted: 1:29 AM on 01.29.11 |
->> I'll second that the VR II version is a lot better, than the first.
Honestly, I don't know a lot of people who said the first 70-200 was a whole lot better than the 80-200, but everyone I have heard has said they LOVED the VR II version way better than the first.
I'd get the VR II if you have the money. |
|
Patrick McPartland, Photographer
|
Buffalo | NY | USA | Posted: 3:15 PM on 02.16.11 |
->> Thank you all. The lens arrived last week and I've basketball with it. To me, the real test will be hockey.
Again thank you all. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|