where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
Hi there folks I am contemplating on purchasing this lens, but I am still on the fence. Obviously I am hoping that somebody here has one and can chime in and divulge a bit more info about it.
IS there a lot of flares and ghosting. I have heard a lot about it and I am not sure how bad is it? Would Hoya's multi coated filter help in any way?
Is the AF all that faster than the previous AF-D version of this lens?
Is it worth the extra money than the cheaper AF-D version?
I owned one of these for quite a few years. Traded it in on a 80-400. That was a mistake. This lens is a very good lens in my opinion. It might not be quite as good as the 70-200mm VR, but pretty close. I had a 70-200 VR for awhile, but got rid of it too (another story). The 80-200 doesn't focus quite as fast as the 70-200 though. If you can get the 80-200 Afs at a reasonable price, go for it.
Back when I owned a D1, I bought a 80-200 AF-D for Event photography and upgraded to the AFS after about 1 week. The AF-S version is more than worth the difference.
When the 70-200 AF-S VR came out I upgraded again to gain more range, VR and better sealing. Now that I have a FullFrame D3, I wish I had it back. It is much better into the sun and also does not vignette.
However, the latest VR II is supposed to be much better yet.
I always prefer the AF-S version of any lens.
I'd hate to steer you away, but I have heard mixed things about the AFS, which could be why it was so quickly replaced by the 70-200mm VR.
If you want a mid range fast tele-zoom under $1k, then you may want to consider the 80-200mm AFD or the Simga 70-200mm HSM. Both are pretty much equal performers and can be had for $1100 or less.
I have both the older 80-200 f2.8 AF-D, and the VR 70-200 f2.8 AF-S, I have heard the issues about vignetting on the VR 70-200 on the full framed sensors, but have not noticed it on my D700's yet??? I have been meaning to dosome testing with the older 80-200 against the VR70-200?? I would really like to get an 80-200f2.8 in AF-S, especially if the older version proves to be better in the corners then the VR70-200???
I have this lens -- and it is very desired - mine took about 7 months
to find, only becuase I didn't want to spend $1100. If you can get it
for $750 then it's a bargain -- around $1100 and you may want to get the
70-200 VR. Even if you get it and don't like it you will be able to sell
it for no loss.
Thanks for the opinions guys. I am not all that bent out of shape to get the AFS version, but if I could find it for a reasonable price I would get it.
But considering that they got for over $1100 on ebay, I would rather get the VR version.
I considered Sigma 70-200 as well as Nikon 80-200 AFD but well to be honest I have one Sigma (50mm 1.4) while it's pretty awesome and much better than Nikon counterpart, I would rather go for Nikon, for it's better build and weather sealing.
You must log in to post.
