Is older Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 D still good lens?

Vladyxa

TPF Noob!
Joined
May 2, 2013
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
Location
Connecticut
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
Please forgive the newbie :blushing: for silly question.

I am considering buying 80-200 f/2.8 lens, and was looking at used ones.

There are different generations of 80-200 f/2.8 lenses.

The one that was produced before current generation, Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 D is that still good lens? How does it compares to current generation 80-200? If I'm not mistaken older generation can be had for half the price of current generation.


TPF Rules do not permit the posting of images to which you do not hold rights. You may edit this post with a link to the image if you wish.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's a very good lens, especially for the money. It may not be quite as good optically as the newer two-ring version, but it's still good. If the price is right, and you need fast, long glass, it's a great way to go.
 
Its a good lens .Sometimes older glass is better then newer glass.I have glass from the 60s i still use .
 
Thank you guys! Is it safe to assume that for 80-200 range this older lens should provide better quality pictures than newer all-around 18-200?
 
I would think the 80-200 would be far sharper than 18-200's and having the constant 2.8 will provide some crazy blown out backgrounds.

They did make a AF-S 80-200 for a short while after releasing the 70-200 VR from what I understand, many people swear by this version.
 
There are several versions of Nikon's 80-200 f/2.8.

This is the current "2-ring" AF version that is still available new - Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras

Far a short time, Nikon also made an AF-S version of the above lens. Used AF-S 80-200mm f/2.8 lens are not often available and get bought up pretty quickly.

And there are 2 older, no longer made AF "push-pull" versions - Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras(Push Pull)
 
I would think the 80-200 would be far sharper than 18-200's and having the constant 2.8 will provide some crazy blown out backgrounds.

They did make a AF-S 80-200 for a short while after releasing the 70-200 VR from what I understand, many people swear by this version.

I think it was just before the 70-200 VR
 
It is an exquisite lens. NOTE: On your camera it's going to be a 120-300mm due to the crop sensor.

It's still 80-200. The FOV will be 120-300 which can be a plus or negative for some.
 
It is an exquisite lens. NOTE: On your camera it's going to be a 120-300mm due to the crop sensor.

It's still 80-200. The FOV will be 120-300 which can be a plus or negative for some.

Due to his proclamation that he is a newbie, I simplified my statement. Discussing FOV vs. actual focal lengths is just confusing to most people.
 
Due to his proclamation that he is a newbie, I simplified my statement. Discussing FOV vs. actual focal lengths is just confusing to most people.

I understand but saying the focal length changes also leads to issues.
 
Due to his proclamation that he is a newbie, I simplified my statement. Discussing FOV vs. actual focal lengths is just confusing to most people.

That's why you don't say it at all. If they've never shot a full frame camera or 35mm film then they have no frame of reference. So the fact that FoV changes is pretty close to irrelevant.
 
I bought the two ring 80-200 and while the vrII 70-200 is far better I am extremely happy for what I paid for it. 600 instead of 2400.00 is a huge difference. Go used and remember that the 80-200 was the go-to lens when it came out.
 
Exactly how does it handle? I mean, I understand how the push pull zoom part works but, how does the focusing collar work or should I say not work during automatic focusing?
 

Most reactions

Back
Top