Direct commercial links are not allowed unless it's from one of our sponsors.

Thanks for looking padlockd. If it's the AF-D that's been photoshopped in, and the AF-S is genuine, that means the bag's HUGE! I'd assumed it was the other way round or I'd misidentified the AF-S, but looking again I think you're right.

It's easy to find dimensions of lenses and bags, but it's better to actually see the bag holding lenses comparable to what you're using. If that AF-D wasn't photoshopped, it would mean the bag was a good size for me. I hope this photoshopping doesn't happen too often.

Ken Rockwell has his...flaws, but you can't accuse him of not being thorough. If there's some weird little detail I want to know about a lens, I check his site first. He has nice pictures of them too.

OT: Is there a rule about when links will be removed? I looked through the rules and didn't see anything. Would be nice to know. (In case it needs to be said, I have no relation to Kata, except that I own one of their bags and think it's really good.)

Edit: Fair enough Niko, in future I'll think a bit more about how I title a thread.

Cold Hands Luke said:
Niko, I think you might have misunderstood the point of my post - I don't think I've spotted anything new, I'm just trying to get a good idea of the size of the bag.

You titled this thread to identify the lenses not to ask about the Kata bag.

Both lenses have aperture rings so they are older AF-D lenses.

Taken from Kata's website

I think you've identified correctly. The one closer looks like the 80-200 AF-S to me. I believe the big one in the middle is a photoshopped AF-D 80-200 2-ring (look at the end of the lens, it's warped strangely). I don't know why they'd photoshop it, unless they couldn't get a bigger lens in time.

Your 300 f/4 should fit just fine (the bag is supposed to be over 20" high), so you should actually have room to spare at the bottom. Maybe a 50 1.8?

Good luck with the bag search - it can be tough!

EDIT: If you're having trouble finding cold hard specs about Nikon lenses, Ken Rockwell (*gasp*) has tons of that on his website. That's the reason I go to his site.

Well if it was an 80-400 then it would mean it was photoshopped, as it's about the same size as the 80-200s. But it's not an 80-400 - there's no VR logo, it has an AF switch instead of a ring, it has AF buttons, the distance scale's in the wrong place, etc.

Niko, I think you might have misunderstood the point of my post - I don't think I've spotted anything new, I'm just trying to get a good idea of the size of the bag. If the picture's been photoshopped it's less useful for that purpose. Would you say they're both 80-200s like I think they are? I'm not really up on the older lenses.

Nothing new. They are just older AF-D lenses. One is even mounted to a Nikon F90 film camera.

All the links are removed now - Sorry can't answer your question.

as far as i can see they are both af-d zooms, 80-200,
(theres also a 18-55mm canon there but thats not important)
and a 80-400 old style i believe?

Ok, so I'm thinking about getting the other half a camera bag, and I'm poking around the Kata website. Her main gear is a D300, a 300/4 AF-S and a Sigma 180 macro (plus my 18-200), so as I look around I'm making a mental note of what lenses are in the pictures for comparison. And I come across the BP-502.
*Link Removed*

(In case that link doesn't work, go to *Link Removed*, type bp-502 into the search box, then click on the one result you get.) In either case, click on the "2" or "3" in the Flash slideshow that loads to see what I'm about to talk about.

The picture shows a fairly large lens attached to the camera, taking up the whole centre of the bag. There's a much smaller lens in the compartment next to it, closer to the viewer. Both are old-style Nikon autofocus zooms. They both look like pro lenses to me. The picture's not quite good enough to read the lens product plates.

Now am I imagining it, or are they both 80-200/2.8 lenses? The centre one looks like a two-ring AF (screwdrive), and the near one looks like an AF-S. But that can't be right, because those two lenses are actually more-or-less the same size, and in the picture one's much smaller than the other.

So what's going on? Have I misidentified one or both lenses, or have Kata photoshopped their bag photo?