Nikon Lenses

Lacock Abbey detail

A
Lacock Abbey detail

  • 0
  • 1
  • 21
Tyndall Bruce

A
Tyndall Bruce

  • 0
  • 0
  • 39
TEXTURES

A
TEXTURES

  • 4
  • 0
  • 65
Small Craft Club

A
Small Craft Club

  • 2
  • 0
  • 60
RED FILTER

A
RED FILTER

  • 1
  • 0
  • 51

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
198,905
Messages
2,782,822
Members
99,743
Latest member
HypnoRospo
Recent bookmarks
0
Joined
Nov 16, 2006
Messages
26
Format
Medium Format
I previously asked this Forum about the difference between the 80-200mm F2.8 and F.28D. In talking with others they suggested checking out the 70-210 F4-5.6 AF lens. Any info would be appreciated, so as I can make a dicisson on what to buy.

Thanks a lot...

F
 

nicefor88

Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
248
Location
Bruxelles, B
Format
35mm
Keep your first idea, the 80-200 f2.8 is just the best buy. It's been replaced now by the 70-200 AFS. Some of them have a problem with the silent internal motor unable to reach infinity, or doing so painfully making ugly noises. Aaaargh! I gave up mine and finally kept my 5-year old 80-200.
:smile:
 

Pinholemaster

Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2005
Messages
1,566
Location
Westminster,
Format
8x10 Format
I owned all three models of the Nikkor 80-200 mm zoom. Other than the first model with the plastic mount for the front element which would easily break, always loved the lens.

Now I have the 70-200 mm zoom. It always reaches infinity, and has never made an ugly noise. Great lens. The more millimeters the better I say. HA!

I'm sorry our friend from Buxelles has had such a problem with the 70-200. Nikon should have fixed your lens under warrantee.
 
OP
OP
Joined
Nov 16, 2006
Messages
26
Format
Medium Format
Thanks

Thanks to all for your input, It has been greatly appreciated.

Thanks again

Frank T (photo144)
 

PhotoJim

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2005
Messages
2,314
Location
Regina, SK, CA
Format
35mm
I own the 70-210/4-5.6 AF and the 80-200/2.8 AF (both non-D). The 2.8 blows away the 4-5.6.

So why do I own both? The 70-210 is about a third of the weight of the 80-200. There are times when I would carry it and not the 2.8. The 70-210 is also dirt cheap. (I paid $55 for mine.)
 

RichA

Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2008
Messages
13
Location
Toronto
Format
35mm
I has to be an exceptional non-ED lens to keep up with an ED lens. I've seen it happen, but most of the old lenses just are not as good. But, old zooms like Vivitar's Series 1 are a dime a dozen so experimenting is cheap.
 

Pumal

Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2009
Messages
580
Format
Multi Format
In term of zooms; the 800-200 f/2.8 is great. I prefer primes. In that area I doubt that an ED would be better than an old one. I have both, but I prefer an old prime any time.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom