Nikon 70-200mm vs Nikon 80-200mm

[simion]

@bhop, makes sense. but perhaps the OS really does make a difference on that sigma
@Mach0, interesting. but yeah, again, if i'll catch it at a steal, will definitely get, but otherwise settle for a sigma (or tamron). i don't know why, but i do trust Sigma more
@sm4him, hahaha! i think us two are on a continuous slow save-up for new lenses, no?

And oh, i actually forgot to mention. Most of it's use will actually be inside (events)

 

[Mach0]

Just an FYI- the 70-200 indoors on a d90 might be a PITA unless you have a lot of space.

 

[simion]

Oh, yes, i'm very aware of that
but usually i have plenty of space as they're large venues, if not, whip out the nifty fifty, if not, my ol' 18-105 and pop a flash with it.

 

[ultimadrift]

One little gripe I had about the 80-200mm f2.8 AF-D is the CA is quite bad wide open but it goes away stopped down at f4. Its a great lens I used to own it until I've upgraded to the 70-200. Which still had a little CA but not as severe

 

[markj]

I opted for the 80-200mm simply because right now I just can't splash the cash as earlier said. The 80-200mm is a great lens, very sharp, But to be honest, It's HEAVY.
Mostly I use it on my tripod or monopod. I paid $700 for my 80-200mm so it made sense to me. Would I have paid $1000, probably not. I feel the 80-200mm will be a
down payment on a 70-200mm in a couple of years.. You really can't loose either way. Good luck with your choice.

 

[2WheelPhoto]

VR (the feature) is worth the extra dough IMO. It makes a bigger difference on a long lens.

+1

The VRII, the coating, focus speed, etc etc etc get the obvious 70-200!

 

[Patriot]

Good thing I found this post. I was told yesterday that the 80-200 beats the 70-200 vrII in sports, portraits, and so on. I been saving up for the 70-200 for some time now and plan on getting it. Is the 70-200 really as heavy as everyone say it is?

 

[jamesbjenkins]

Good thing I found this post. I was told yesterday that the 80-200 beats the 70-200 vrII in sports, portraits, and so on. I been saving up for the 70-200 for some time now and plan on getting it. Is the 70-200 really as heavy as everyone say it is?

The 70-200 vrII is heavy, around 3lbs. However, whoever told you that the 80-200 beats it in sports or portraits or anything really either intentionally lied to you or doesn't have a clue what they're talking about. The VRII is the same line of lens, just two (or three) models newer. Aside from the zoom creep, it's an almost perfect lens.

Think about it, what car do you know whose 2003 model is better than its 2009 model?

 

[jhodges10]

Think about it, what car do you know whose 2003 model is better than its 2009 model?

Poor example as it depends on your metric. Top Gear UK did an episode where they raced older models against newer models and the results were roughly 50/50. But that doesn't mean you're wrong about the lens.

 

[Patriot]

If I buy the lens here while I'm stationed in Korea will there be a problem if I try to use the warranty when I'm back stateside? I really don't want to wait for it in the mail.

 

[jamesbjenkins]

If I buy the lens here while I'm stationed in Korea will there be a problem if I try to use the warranty when I'm back stateside? I really don't want to wait for it in the mail.

If you buy a US model, you should be fine. If you buy the local model, you'll have to send it back to Korea if you need warranty service.

 

[jamesbjenkins]

But that doesn't mean you're wrong about the lens.

I'm glad you ended with this. You almost had me a bit irritated at the obscure rebuttal.

Thankfully, lenses are quite a bit easier to compare head to head with they're the same class and focal length. MTF curves don't lie. Neither to ED elements or nano coating. :cheers:

 

[thereyougo!]

If I buy the lens here while I'm stationed in Korea will there be a problem if I try to use the warranty when I'm back stateside? I really don't want to wait for it in the mail.

If you buy a US model, you should be fine. If you buy the local model, you'll have to send it back to Korea if you need warranty service.

Wrong. Lenses have worldwide warranties. Bodies have national warranties. Look at the booklet next time. And on the other point, newer isn't always better. We all justify this to ourselves (and our better halves) but the 80 - 200 is a perfectly sharp lens. Yes, it's heavy as hell and it doesn't have VR. But it's by most accounts I have seen, just as sharp as the 70 - 200 VRII. The AFS has ED glass but not the nano coating.

 

[jamesbjenkins]

If I buy the lens here while I'm stationed in Korea will there be a problem if I try to use the warranty when I'm back stateside? I really don't want to wait for it in the mail.

If you buy a US model, you should be fine. If you buy the local model, you'll have to send it back to Korea if you need warranty service.

Wrong. Lenses have worldwide warranties. Bodies have national warranties. Look at the booklet next time. And on the other point, newer isn't always better. We all justify this to ourselves (and our better halves) but the 80 - 200 is a perfectly sharp lens. Yes, it's heavy as hell and it doesn't have VR. But it's by most accounts I have seen, just as sharp as the 70 - 200 VRII. The AFS has ED glass but not the nano coating.

Try to get an Asian model serviced at a US repair shop under warranty and then come back and talk to us, smart guy. I speak from personal experience last year when the AF motor in my 70-200 VR1 gave out.

Of course newer isn't always better. I never said there was anything wrong with the old 80-200. That thing is built to withstand nuclear war. The sharpness may well be great; however, the 80-200 AF-S autofocus is noticeably slower and less accurate than the 70-200 VR2.

And, thanks to the lack of nano coating, the flare and ghosting on the 80-200 is a real booger. Good luck shooting into a strong light source with it...

:cheers:

 

[thereyougo!]

If you buy a US model, you should be fine. If you buy the local model, you'll have to send it back to Korea if you need warranty service.

Wrong. Lenses have worldwide warranties. Bodies have national warranties. Look at the booklet next time. And on the other point, newer isn't always better. We all justify this to ourselves (and our better halves) but the 80 - 200 is a perfectly sharp lens. Yes, it's heavy as hell and it doesn't have VR. But it's by most accounts I have seen, just as sharp as the 70 - 200 VRII. The AFS has ED glass but not the nano coating.

Try to get an Asian model serviced at a US repair shop under warranty and then come back and talk to us, smart guy. I speak from personal experience last year when the AF motor in my 70-200 VR1 gave out.

Of course newer isn't always better. I never said there was anything wrong with the old 80-200. That thing is built to withstand nuclear war. The sharpness may well be great; however, the 80-200 AF-S autofocus is noticeably slower and less accurate than the 70-200 VR2.

And, thanks to the lack of nano coating, the flare and ghosting on the 80-200 is a real booger. Good luck shooting into a strong light source with it...

:cheers:

Well the US repair shop isn't doing its job then and you need to hold it to account. The paperwork clearly states WORLDWIDE and your US centre should be honouring that. I have had no issue getting UK repair agents to look at lenses.

I wouldn't want to be shooting at 200mm direct in to a very strong light source - could cook the sensor. Flare is much more of an issue with wide angles... I have an AFS 80 - 200 which I'm very happy with. I paid less than £800 for it whereas the 70 - 200 VR II is twice the price even second hand. Is it twice the lens? If hand holding, possibly, but if its on a tripod, I'm not sure it is.

Oh and lose the knowitall attitude it's not helping the OP. I don't get the attitude of some on here.