Nikon Telephoto Zooms

[rmh159]

I'm starting to eye up a telephoto zoom and have it pretty narrowed down to Nikon's 70-300 f4.5 VR or their 80-200 f2.8. There's about a $300 price difference with the 80 - 200 being on the higher end. Does anyone have any experience with both lenses? Would the VR compensate for the smaller max aperture? Any other advice is appreciated.

 

[smyth]

Depends on what you will be using it for. Indoor sports, such as basketball, or night time photography you'll want the f2.8.

I would go with the f2.8 myself.

 

[rmh159]

I'd like to be able to use the lens in any situation but in reality 90% of my shooting is outdoors in daylight. That said I was looking at the two as if the VR on the slower lens would compensate for not having the 2.8 aperture of the faster lens, though I believe the 2.8 is just a flat out better quality lens and maintains the 2.8 through the zoom range.

 

[smyth]

VR only helps with camera shake, so if you're shooting a fast moving subject in low light, VR won't help you much.

 

[dewey]

I own the 70-200 VR and I used to own the 80-200 non-VR. Personally I would go for the faster aperature - but I like to shoot at very high shutter speeds and I also use it for weddings which is usually low light. I also know that the quality of the 80-200 is much better than the 70-300 which is a bit to plastic for my taste at that price. As mentioned above VR only helps with shake, it won't stop motion like a fast shutter speed.

My vote is to save up for the higher quality lens - you can always get a tele later if you need more reach.

 

[Mike_E]

f2.8 doubled is f5.6. this is only relevant if you use a doubler for a resultant f5.6 400mm lens and on a D body is 600mm at f5.6. I don't exactly recall what a 600mm f5.6 lens goes for but the worth of the f2.8 is... well, you get the point. mike