Nikon 80-200mm F/2.8 AF D "One Touch"

[photogincollege]

The 80-200 cant use a teleconverter? why is that?

 

[Garbz]

An 80-200 cant do that.

Ahh so Nikon is just blowing marketing fluff when they list the Nikkor TC-14A, TC-14B, and TC-201 as accessories to the 80-200?

Also the noise thing isn't that bad really. There are some very noisy and slow to focus AF D type lenses. The 80-200 is definitely one of the best. My computer fans are louder than the camera focusing, I am not sure how much this has to do with the camera as opposed to the lens gearing (I know the D70 is slower to focus but is it louder too) but I think AF-S is waaaaay over hyped, the future yes all lenses will tend to this motor system, but currently it's a convenience not a necessity and my personal reserve is that for a $1600AU lens (the 80-200 f/2.8 AF) I would pay maximum $150 more for an AF-S convenience, which simply does not happen at the moment (the AF-S costs over $2100AU from the same supplier).

It's all a question of economics. If I had an unlimited supply of money then by all means I'd buy a AF-S 70-200 f/2.8 VR, forget the 80-200 AF-S and strap that to my D3, but realistically my opinion is that the 80-200 is by far the sweetest and sharpest bang for your buck you can ever get and beyond that things become a luxury.

 

[Silverbackmp]

Well I just purchased the Sigma 18-50 F/2.8 HSM Macro to compliment it; I should be done lens shopping for a while. I'm not as convinced about this purchase as I was the 80-200. However, the savings gained from both lenses is allowing me to purchase a nice carbon fiber tripod (maybe GITZO mountaineer), a good quality ball head with pan lock, automatic Bogen monopod, B + W filters, etc.

 

[Snyder]

Ahh so Nikon is just blowing marketing fluff when they list the Nikkor TC-14A, TC-14B, and TC-201 as accessories to the 80-200?

lets not forget then
TC-14b (manual focus only)
TC-201 or TC-14a (manual focus only & occasional vignetting may occur)

Sounds like a great thing to get the teleconvertors for this lense.

And yes it still is a noisey lense.

 

[jstuedle]

I don't find either of my 80-200's all that noisy. Certainly no more so than my 300 f/4 or even the non-VR 24-120. Slightly more than the 35-70 f/2.8. I use them all the time and as I said before, I can't justify buying a VR version when I am perfectly happy with the 2 non-VR 80-200's I already own.

 

[Garbz]

lets not forget then
TC-14b (manual focus only)
TC-201 or TC-14a (manual focus only & occasional vignetting may occur)

We didn't forget. You said you can't use teleconverters. I said you can. AF was never part of the discussion. Anyway it is not like manual focus only is a deterrent for many of the users on this forum (me points at the D40 users).

 

[Silverbackmp]

Just got the lens in the mail today. I don't think the autofocus will prove to be an issue with the D80. And I have to say "oh my gosh!!!!" Once you go F/2.8 there is no going back!!!

The follwing is not that good of a composition but I'm lovin the boken:

 

[jstuedle]

I knew you would like the lens. Congrats!

 

[monkeykoder]

Looks like an excellent lens for the price. I guess you could always spend more and get better but is there a need?

 

[sabbath999]

What is this?

Actually owning a lens and commenting about it after you take pictures with it? That's outrageous.

The only true way to tell if a lens is any good is to read lens tests on the internet or comments by people who have never owned or shot one... not to actually take pictures with one for yourself! Didn't you know that?

Just kidding... obviously...

Have fun with your new lens, it is awesome.

 

[jstuedle]

What is this?

Actually owning a lens and commenting about it after you take pictures with it? That's outrageous.

The only true way to tell if a lens is any good is to read lens tests on the internet or comments by people who have never owned or shot one... not to actually take pictures with one for yourself! Didn't you know that?

Obviously an outrage! We have standards don't you know? Conventions that must be adhered to! Yes, a total outrage!


Enjoy, and post some more. You are going to love it.

 

[shivaswrath]

Not to change the topic TOO drastically, but I'm sort of in a similar situation.

I have the below listed lenses, and am pretty happy as I'm learning the nuances of dSLR photography. . .however, my honeymoon is coming up and I'll be traveling to Paris, where, as I've seen from Mav's shot's on his trip to Paris, there are a lot of low light shots (inside of Museums, the Eiffel tower at night, etc.). . .I don't want to miss the right shot and frankly want to be perfectly equipped.

I'm wondering if anyone can comment on if I need to "upgrade" to a 17-55 f/2.8 lens or would the current VR enable kit lens and zoom lens suffice?

The OP's comment "once you go f/2.8 you never go back" really got me thinking, and since I've never tried out heavy glass before, I'm just wondering. . .and yeah, I own these "cheaper" Nikon VR lenses because I'm getting married and can't afford (read justify) $1500 lenses (but am willing to trade in both lenses and take the heat if a f/2.8 lens like the Nikon 17-55 f/2.8 is worth the trade "up"). . .

Thanks for any advice or direction guys, so far you all have been very helpful in guiding me through my lens decisions. . .

Suneil

PS, I'll go and check out a 17-55 at my local camera shop as well so I can get a feel of it if you guys weight in favor of the f/2.8

 

[dipstick]

Not to change the topic TOO drastically, but I'm sort of in a similar situation.

I have the below listed lenses, and am pretty happy as I'm learning the nuances of dSLR photography. . .however, my honeymoon is coming up and I'll be traveling to Paris, where, as I've seen from Mav's shot's on his trip to Paris, there are a lot of low light shots

For the sake of your marriage, you might wanna bring a P&S and leave the big lenses at home

The 17-55 is a nice lens though...

 

[sabbath999]

I have kind of a different take on it, I guess (talking about expensive, heavy lenses on travel trips).

I just got back from 9 days on the big island of Hawai'i (this isn't a once-in-a-lifetime trip for us though, Kailua-Kona is basically my home-away-from-home) and I didn't take a single 2.8 lens with me. I own 3, a 70-200 VR, a 105 VR and a Sigma 24-60 2.8.

I took 3 DSLR bodies, a D300, a D80 and a D40, I took an SB-600, my beloved Tamron 70-300, my 55-200 VR, my 18-55 kit lens and my wife's 18-200 VR and one of those c-clamp things with a ball head instead of a tripod.

We took zoo pictures at Hilo, and I used my featherweight 70-300 there and my D300 with the SB-600. My wife shot her 18-200 on her D80. Those were the only times the D80 and the D300 and the SB-600 even made it out of the bag or even the hotel room. The entire rest of the vacation I shot with the D40 in a small secondary bag, with the 18-55 kit lens and the 55-200 VR.

Why?

Because they are small, weigh nothing, cost very little and if they are stolen or dropped on the lava while hiking, or drenched by one of the fast downpours that hit you on the Hilo side, then it is not nearly as big of a deal as if you drop a D300 with a $1700 lens on it (or fall into the sea, or bang it against the rocks while climbing, or whatever)...

Another consideration for us is that we left our hotel at 6 am and often didn't return to it until 10 pm... and frankly the very thought of dragging around all that 2.8 glass all day makes my back ache (you CANNOT leave cameras in your car on the big island... they will not be there when you get back, it is a stone cold guarantee... when you go there, leave absolutely nothing in your car and leave it unlocked so they won't break out the windows checking it out... our car was gone through twice when we were there this time, and once every other car in the lot had a window broken out).

My pictures are clear, sharp, and look really good. The errors in them are not the fault of the cameras or the lenses, they are from the photographer. The D40 really takes great pictures, the image quality is fantastic... and the two cheap lenses are both very light and extremely sharp.

If I needed to take shots in darker areas, I simply got out my clamp, clamped it on a rail or something, and POOF, instant POD. I put the camera on 10 second delay, and there we go.

I even got some great low light shots of Nene (the endangered goose that is the state bird of Hawai'i in four different encounters with them...)

When shooting pictures of the Nene in low light, I really wished I had the 70-200 VR, but then again that would have meant dragging the 4 pound beasty around with me for 16 hours a day. NO THANKS! It is better to miss a shot or two.

(BTW I am totally ignoring our underwater photography gear that my wife was using while she was diving, plus the fact that we carried two full-sized bicycles and all of her diving gear with us as well... between that and all the cameras I did take, it was enough stuff for one trip... we even thew in a couple shirts, a couple pairs of shorts, and some undies as well).

To me when I travel on vacation, I enjoy photography, but I enjoy the rest of the trip more... the photographs (for me) are to capture the memories of the place... it would be different if the purpose of my trip was to take pictures (if I were going on a photo safari in Africa or a polar bear adventure) where the main goal was photography.

If i were you, I would take my camera and have fun with it, but really isn't the whole purpose of a honeymoon in Paris about something other than photography?

Just my take on it... my opinion is no more valid than anybody else.

 

[shivaswrath]

Sabbath,
As always, your opinions are always welcomed! I think it's hilarious that you have such an amazing glass and body selection, but you opt for the D40 + the two lenses I own.

You're right, I'm getting a tamrac bag to carry my two lenses + body around and I am 100% positive I'll be walking around Paris the whole time, I doubt I'll have the energy to carry the f/2.8 . . .excellent perspective, and I guess as I guess better, I can "upgrade". . .I guess I'll need to learn to tweak my A, S, and ISO parameters in manual to get those awesome night shots. . .I'll probably PM you about that soon. . .