Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR vs 80-200 f/2.8

jstuedle · Sep 9, 2007

Let me elaborate a little on my earlier post. I have an early 80-200 2.8 of the "one touch" variety without a tripod collar. My other is a AF non-S type with 2 rings and a tripod collar. I use the one touch almost exclusively and shoot indoors live band gigs a lot with it. With proper hand holding and panning technique it is a great lens and I don't need VR. VR would not work with the active bands I shoot anyway as it can't freeze motion. The one-touch lets me zoom lightning fast and that feature is not available in a S or VR version. Because it doesn't have the tripod mount, they are a vary reasonable lens, one of the early AF versions. I like it for boat and car races and air shows as well as wild birds and raptors. Just a good action lens. I can't really see what advantage a VR would give me for the type of shooting I do.

Sweetsomedays · Sep 9, 2007

So is that your kind way of saying to a newbie "You don't need VR you silly thing"?

Forgive me what do you mean VR can't freeze motion?
80-200 has faster zoom then the VR. I with I could try them out, flustering.

Sweetsomedays · Sep 9, 2007

What are the differences between the AF-S and the AF-D?

jstuedle · Sep 9, 2007

The VR feature will only help with "camera shake" or improve your hand held shots by allowing a slower shutter speed. It is only faster shutter speeds that can freeze motion. The VR feature can't help you use a faster shutter in low light conditions.

The one-touch zoom I have is a old discontinued auto-focus model. It has one long collar that does both zoom and focus. The collar is pulled/pushed back and forth to zoom and is twisted to manually focus if that is your focus mode. I never have to move from one collar to another when using this lens. I also use a 35-70 f/2.8 zoom a lot that has the same type of one-touch feature. I like to preset a focus in manual for my band shots and quickly zoom between a wide shot of all band members and one individual performer. By presetting the focus I don't miss the very fast focus of a AF-S lens. I find the push/pull zoom much faster than the 2 collar type lens to zoom. There is no push\pull VR model, this is why I feel the 80-200 I have can zoom faster than a new VR AF-S version.

Garbz · Sep 9, 2007

The S on AF-S stands for SilentWave Motor. The lens has a tiny ultrasonic motor in it which focuses with very high torque and low noise very quickly. The other model the standard AF has a mechanical connection to the camera and a motor in the camera turns the AF ring. The camera is thus slower to respond to a change in focus when tracking the subject. Also with the AF-S the focus ring forms an override. If the camera focus is off slightly just grab the ring and adjust. On the AF lens you would have to flick the focus coupling ring to manual before you can grab and readjust the focus. Mind you in either case I guess the moment would be lost.
Both lenses are D type meaning the distance information is communicated to the camera.

To give you a practical example of the whole freezing motion business. Suppose you're trying to shoot one of your equestrians either handhold or on a monopod, and suppose you need at least 1/200th to get a sharp stop motion picture. Now add VR to the equation and it gets a bit dark, say 1/4 of the light. So now your exposure is 1/50th and VR will do a wonderful job keeping the scene sharp. Unfortunately it's only the scene which will be sharp. VR will not tell the horses to move at 1/4 of the speed. So everything will be sharp in the frame that isn't moving, so while you can shoot at 1/50th your horseback subject will be a massive blur. The only thing to counter this is to up the ISO, underexpose, or open the aperture, of which both lenses have the same widest aperture of f/2.8

JodieO · Sep 9, 2007

VR. Definitely. Especially if you hand-hold the camera a lot (I shoot a lot of action with kids, with animals, etc., and a tripod or monopod is not always ideal especially when it is a split second that I have to capture the image and need to squat down, lie down, climb up onto something, etc.)... also if you tend to get excitable about the image you are trying to capture and have a tendency to shake the camera! lolol!

You know what is stupid but really bad for me? When I am on a shoot and I get low blood sugar and my hands start to shake, and I have forgotten to bring some orange juice or something.... yikes!

VR - all the way! lolol!

Sweetsomedays · Sep 9, 2007

I appreciate everyones advice. As super awesome as the VR lens is I'm sure I decided to go with the 80-200 AF-S. If I find myself wishing I had had the VR I will either work at getting a more steady hand or work on earning more money to get the VR lens

Either way I'm pretty dang excited.

jstuedle · Sep 10, 2007

Sweetsomedays said:
I appreciate everyones advice. As super awesome as the VR lens is I'm sure I decided to go with the 80-200 AF-S. If I find myself wishing I had had the VR I will either work at getting a more steady hand or work on earning more money to get the VR lens Either way I'm pretty dang excited.

As well you should be!