Results 1 to 12 of 12
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By BlairWright

Thread: 70-200mm f2.8 vs 80-200mm f2.8

  1. #1
    No longer a newbie, moving up!
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    85
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    13 times

    70-200mm f2.8 vs 80-200mm f2.8

    So from what I have been able to read, the 70mm focuses a bit faster.

    Otherwise, can anyone summarize why so much more for the 70mm? From what I can tell the 80mm is still a truly professional lens - - and is so much cheaper than the 70mm.

    What factors should one use to decide between these lenses, assuming budget is not an issue?



  2. #2
    I spend too much of my life on TPF!
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    473
    My Gallery
    (0)
    Liked
    29 times
    i own the 80-200 afs and its VERY sharp wide open, personally i think its more closer focusing range and VR other than that perhaps a hair sharper.

  3. #3
    I spend too much of my life on TPF!
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Burnaby, BC
    Posts
    959
    My Gallery
    (16)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    201 times
    Because the 70-200 is that much more awesome and will save you more money in the long run when you realise that you should have gotten the better lens in the first place
    “In all affairs it's a healthy thing now and then to hang a question mark on the things you have long taken for granted.”
    Bertrand Russell

  4. #4
    I spend too much of my life on TPF!
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Maryland USA
    Posts
    334
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    31 times
    Get what you can afford, they are both great lenses but if you can afford the VR lens you will end up with better shots; VR does make a big enough difference to consider spending the extra money IMO.

    -B
    Nikon_Josh likes this.
    ELUSION | custom wedding and portrait photography
    MD / DC / VA • http://elusionphotos.com


  5. #5
    ann
    ann is offline
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    4,260
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    188 times
    I have owned both, in fact for a long time the 80-200 was my everyday lens. Basically used with film, but with digital it was fine.

    When I updated to a d700 i also update to the 70-200 as the newer coatings fit the digital world better (imho).

    The 80-200 begin an older lens , is one reason for the cost difference.

    I would agree with Blair ,buy what you can afford.

  6. #6
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Tampa
    Posts
    6,850
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    1003 times
    Quote Originally Posted by chuasam View Post
    Because the 70-200 is that much more awesome and will save you more money in the long run when you realise that you should have gotten the better lens in the first place

    ^^^^ that...
    D800 |Nikon 24-70 | Nikon 70-200 VRII | 50mm f/1.4 | Manfrotto | pocketwizards | flashes

  7. #7
    I spend too much of my life on TPF!
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Surrey, UK
    Posts
    936
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    95 times
    Yep.. it has VR! Big bonus..

  8. #8
    I spend too much of my life on TPF!
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Burnaby, BC
    Posts
    959
    My Gallery
    (16)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    201 times
    with the 80-200, you have to stop down to f/4 to get a decent sharpness. You can get the same sharpness with the 70-200 at f/2.8
    in addition, you can hand hold the VR lens up to 5 stops (4 stops if you're conservative) slower than without VR.
    ergo...buying the 70-200 is really the cheaper way to go.
    “In all affairs it's a healthy thing now and then to hang a question mark on the things you have long taken for granted.”
    Bertrand Russell

  9. #9
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,926
    My Gallery
    (15)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    129 times
    Im not sure where these comments about the 80-200mm not being as sharp wide open are coming from, have u guys used this lens? I see no difference in contrast or sharpness at f2.8, having owned both. Also the af-s version of the 80-200mm focus just as fast as the newer lenses.

    I havent used the new vr2 and ive heard it's even better wide open, but the vr1 version is not optically better then the 80-200.

  10. #10
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,729
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    86 times
    I have used both, there is definitely enough difference to merit the price variance.


  11. #11
    Mr. Rain Cloud
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    28,174
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    9671 times
    When you day "80-200mm f/2.8" you realize there are a NUMBER of different versions, right??? The somewhat rare 80-200 f/2.8 AF-S, made only for a short period of time, is probably optically the best of the 80-200 models Nikon made, and still commands $995 or so used. It focuses fast, and can follow-focus pretty rapidly-moving targets, because it uses the AF-S focusing protocol, which is frankly, MUCH more-advanced than screw-drive. AF-S and screw drive are not just different mechanical protocols, but ENTIRELY different systems for determining focusing point. AF-S is smart; screw drive has no intelligence whatsoever,and lacks any predictive focusing ability. AF-S has the ability to predict the exact focus point based upon early data analysis...screw drive is like dttz-dtizzz-dtzz-ditzzz-ditzz-dittz...AF-S is like ditz-ditz....focused. (all sounds are simulated!!!)

    The 80-200 AF-D model currently available for $550-$700 used is a solid performer, but from what I have seen, it's NOT as good as either of the two AF-S 70-200 models, nor its successor, the 80-200 AF-S.

    The earlier 80-200 AF models with the "one ring" have a number of optical issues...color fringing at the longer end, loss of contrast wide-open,not-so-great image quality at minimum focusing distance, needing to stop down to f/4 for acceptable "modern" performance levels...kind of a Sigma- or Tamron-like lens...almost professional lens quality, at a low price...I owned two of those....the 70-200 VR, Gen I is VASTLY better, in almost every respect.

    The bokeh, or out of focus image rendering of the 70-200 VR and the newer model is much better than the 80-200 AF-D, in my view.
    "It's about time people started taking photography seriously, and treating it as a hobby." Elliott Erwitt

    My most recent photos posted to TPF http://www.pbase.com/derrel/recent_tpf_uploads&page=all

  12. #12
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,926
    My Gallery
    (15)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    129 times
    Quote Originally Posted by Derrel View Post
    The earlier 80-200 AF models with the "one ring" have a number of optical issues...color fringing at the longer end, loss of contrast wide-open,not-so-great image quality at minimum focusing distance, needing to stop down to f/4 for acceptable "modern" performance levels...kind of a Sigma- or Tamron-like lens...almost professional lens quality, at a low price...I owned two of those....the 70-200 VR, Gen I is VASTLY better, in almost every respect.
    I think you're overstating the negatives of the older one-ring AF model, I used one for a while and it performed better then you are describing--very close to the 80-200mm AF-S and 70-200mm VR1 I've also used (sharpness and contrast was the same, but fringing was an issue), and much better wide-open then the sigmas and tamron's I've tried.

 

 

Ads

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. canon 70-200mm f4L vs sigma 70-200mm f2.8 vs tamron 70-200mm f2.8???
    By slc33 in forum Photography Equipment & Products
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 01-13-2012, 11:58 AM
  2. tamron70-200mm f2.8 vs canon 200mm f2.8 prime
    By drewd40 in forum Photography Equipment & Products
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 12-30-2011, 04:51 PM
  3. Sony 18-200mm vs the Tamron 18-200mm lens
    By tranceplant in forum Photography Equipment & Products
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-12-2011, 11:25 AM
  4. ADVICE: Nikkor 18-200mm VR or Tamron 18-200mm??
    By jsub in forum Photography Equipment & Products
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-19-2008, 10:38 AM

Search tags for this page

70-200mm vs 80-200mm nikon
,
canon 70-200mm vs nikon 80-200mm
,
canon 80-200 f2.8 vs canon 70-200 f2.8
,
canon 80-200 f2.8l vs 70-200
,

canon 80-200 vs 70-200

,
canon 80-200mm 2.8 vs 70-200
,

canon 80-200mm f2.8l

,

nikon 80-200mm vs canon 70-200

Click on a term to search for related topics.