<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="bbPress/1.1" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Nikon Rumors Forum &#187; Topic: 80-200 AF-D + 1.4 Teleconverter or 70-300 VR?</title>
		<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3371</link>
		<description>where there’s smoke there’s forum fire</description>
		<language>en-US</language>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2013 10:58:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<generator>http://bbpress.org/?v=1.1</generator>
		<textInput>
			<title><![CDATA[Search]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[Search all topics from these forums.]]></description>
			<name>q</name>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/search.php</link>
		</textInput>
		<atom:link href="http://nikonrumors.com/forum/rss.php?topic=3371" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />

		<item>
			<title>TheCaz on "80-200 AF-D + 1.4 Teleconverter or 70-300 VR?"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3371#post-58538</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 13 Mar 2011 21:21:07 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>TheCaz</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">58538@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>Peppermint, there's no need for this to be complicated. Since you already have an 80-200 that you like and have a budget of $500, look at the Nikon teleconverters. If the idea of lighter weight intrigues you, try the 70-300mm first.</p>
<p>Most stores have 30 day return policies, so buy from one of them and find out which works for you.
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>kanuck on "80-200 AF-D + 1.4 Teleconverter or 70-300 VR?"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3371#post-58536</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 13 Mar 2011 20:07:08 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>kanuck</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">58536@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>I think you'd love the 70-300mm VR on your D700. I used to have one and thought it was a great lens. Despite the lack of 2.8, I always felt the 70-300 was faster than the 80-200! Seriously, but obviously not as fast as the 70-200 lenses. Maybe I had a great sample? It is super light, sharp, a good price, and the VR is really wonderful. I used to have a 70-200mm VR 1 but gave it up for the weight, and eventually traded in my 70-300 for the new 28-300mm VR. For some reason the D700 and the 70-300mm are one of those magical combinations. Some lenses really work well together giving excellent results go get one!
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>IndyGeoff on "80-200 AF-D + 1.4 Teleconverter or 70-300 VR?"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3371#post-58469</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 12 Mar 2011 09:13:10 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>IndyGeoff</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">58469@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>80-200 with TC gives you effectively two lenses, one with f2.8 and one longer reach that is a little slower depending on which TC you use.
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Peppermint15 on "80-200 AF-D + 1.4 Teleconverter or 70-300 VR?"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3371#post-58457</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 12 Mar 2011 01:28:38 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Peppermint15</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">58457@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>I am mostly concerned with image quality at the 200mm+ focal lengths. I don't need VR because I'm shooting outdoors during the day at 1/500 or 1/750 at least. I'm not concerned a whole lot with the build. I am very tempted by the 70-300, but I already own the 80-200 and don't want to sell it and regret it later. Don't know much about the Tokina 80-400...
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>TaoTeJared on "80-200 AF-D + 1.4 Teleconverter or 70-300 VR?"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3371#post-58382</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2011 02:58:44 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>TaoTeJared</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">58382@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>Nikon 70-300VR - VR will help tons and it is a great lens.  </p>
<p>80-200 is great also but much much heavier.  Adding a TC just reduces the IQ especially if it is not a Nikon one.
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Drdobs on "80-200 AF-D + 1.4 Teleconverter or 70-300 VR?"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3371#post-58350</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2011 22:14:39 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Drdobs</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">58350@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>This may sway your decision - 70-300 Refurb for $349.95<br />
<a href="http://www.adorama.com/NK70300AFVRR.html?utm_term=Other&#038;utm_medium=Affiliate&#038;utm_campaign=Other&#038;utm_source=rflAID021866" rel="nofollow">http://www.adorama.com/NK70300AFVRR.html?utm_term=Other&#038;utm_medium=Affiliate&#038;utm_campaign=Other&#038;utm_source=rflAID021866</a></p>
<p>I own one and love it..</p>
<p>Jon
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>JeramPhotography on "80-200 AF-D + 1.4 Teleconverter or 70-300 VR?"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3371#post-58347</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2011 21:31:48 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>JeramPhotography</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">58347@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>I dont know about the TC but the 80-200 is a great lens.  Nothing beats F2.8 @200.
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Krevlin on "80-200 AF-D + 1.4 Teleconverter or 70-300 VR?"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3371#post-58343</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2011 21:12:48 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Krevlin</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">58343@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>If I were you I'd look into getting a Kenko 1.7x or 2x</p>
<p>I use to own the Tokina and while I liked it's build quality and it's optical quality I absolutely hated how slow the AF was on my D90 and that I could not really use it in anything but bright sunlight outdoors.</p>
<p>Also the focal lengths would overlap so you'd basically be stuck with a 300-400 that goes from f/5.2 to f/5.6.</p>
<p>The 2XTC + 80-200 combo would be the best because you get the 400mm @ f/5.6 and the aperture values along the focal length will be better compared to the other lenses as well as you can always remove the TC and get f/2.8 where the others will always start at f/4.5
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Peppermint15 on "80-200 AF-D + 1.4 Teleconverter or 70-300 VR?"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3371#post-58336</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:56:37 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Peppermint15</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">58336@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>What would produce better images on a D700?</p>
<p>-Nikon 80-200 f2.8 AF-D with a Kenko 1.4x teleconverter (equiv. of 112-280mm)<br />
-Nikon 70-300 VR<br />
-Tokina 80-400 (can't afford and really don't want the Nikon version)</p>
<p>I mostly need the 200-400 end, and I'm shooting outdoors during the day. I already own the 80-200 which is a very good quality lens, but I need more zoom. I'm also considering using the DX crop mode. My budget is $500 max.
</p></description>
		</item>

	</channel>
</rss>
