Jacotte Loc: Cape Town, South Africa

On a D800?

Some say the older 80-200 is better quality...does this hold any truth?

brucewells Loc: Central Kentucky

The glass of the 80-200 f/2.8 D (2-ring) is super! The blades of the aperture are not rounded, and this gives you beautiful sunbursts on points of light. They are built like a tank, all metal!

The 70-200 f/2.8 VRII has glass as good, and the VR is a big plus. Additionally, the focus is much faster, and spot on. The ability to manually adjust focus after the lens AFs is a big, big plus. The blades are rounded, however, so it doesn't give the sunbursts like the old lens does.

I had the 80-200 and loved it. It always produced great photos. I saved up till I could get the 70-200, then sold the 80-200. I must admit, there's a lot of love for that old lens and there are times I yearn for it back. But, the 70-200 amazes me every time I use it.

Bottom line, you won't be disappointed with either of them.

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

brucewells is correctbut there is an alternative.

I have the 70-200/2.8. Heavy and overpriced it works well with my D800 and i'll keep it but if you are willing to manually focus, the even older 80-200/4.5 offers equal or even sharper performance on the D800 for around $75 used.

exposeu Loc: Wenatchee, WA

I rented the 70-200 VRI but when I found an near perfect 80-200 AF-S 2.8 for $800, I picked it up. The 80-200 was the right choice for me. I use it on a D300 and D7000 with no problems.

The Fonz Loc: Queensland, mate!

Probably true to a point, optically, although you'll loose a bit of fore/background isolation and speed....and that's also true for the f4 version in both MF and AF.

shutterbob Loc: Tucson

Quality wise, the 80-200 has proved itself. It will last forever. The glass in it is superb. Though slightly slower to focus, it is still pretty fast. For shots where you cannot use a tripod the 70-200 is a better choice with the VR, but to answer your question concerning quality.......they are both "pro" lenses with top shelf build and optics. The 80-200 is probably a tiny bit 'sturdier' while the 70-200 may be ever so slightly better in optics since it benefits from more modern technology. I have the 70-200, but wish I had kept my 80-200 as well.

lone ranger Loc: Port Saint Lucie, Florida

their both excellent, however, if I remember correctly the older lens, is a bit slower on focus

rwinch Loc: Walkersville, MD

I have been using a friends 80-200 f2.8D, and it has been a great lens. Note that there are several versions, based on the focus limit switch - I would get the slide switch version. Anyway, it got me thinking about performance vs. price for adding to my collection. I ended up deciding to commit to using the older film series D lenses (all 35mm lenses BTW!), to get as good if not better performance (knowing I would not have image stabilization). I recently purchased used in great condition the 80-200 f/2.8D for $460 (vs. ~$2400 for new 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II), the 35-70 f/2.8D in near mint condition of $400 (vs. ~$1900 for the new 24-70mm f/2.8G ED). I am not a professional photographer, and a $3440 savings on what are still great quality lenses is significant - I can buy all sorts of other goodies. I am now looking for the 17-35 f/2.8D to get my Holy Trinity, and then a couple of primes....all in the D version. Long story short - definitely consider them!

Wayne93 Loc: Montrose, Colorado

Check out KEH, they are honest guys and are very reputable and have good prices on used equipment.

rwinch Loc: Walkersville, MD

Yup - that is where I just got my 80-200 f2.8D! Also look on Ebay - but you need to be a bit more careful.

Jacotte Loc: Cape Town, South Africa

Thanks everyone for your opinions. I will take a look around to see what is available! I do think having a VR lens could be a big plus when taking pics of children.... But then again the 80-200 seems to have such good reviews, and at a much more pleasant cost!!! choices choices! :)

jaycherry

There is no truth to the statement. However; the 80-200mm f/2.8 is a great lens. The lenses in this range seem to get better as the model evolves to include VR and VR 2. The older 80-200 mm with the push pull focusing and zoom system was very slow. The "d' model was a little faster but still slow compared to "D" new with the zoom and the focusing on seperate controls. the 80-200mm AF-S model was the fastest of the 80-200mm f/2.8, but was also the heaviest of the 4. The first 70-200mm f/2.8 VR was faster, lighter, and sharper. The 70-200mm f/2.8 VR !! blows all the rest out of the water with one of the fastest focusing systems that I have used in a zoom lens. That said, I still have the 80-200mm f/2.8D New. I hope that this helps a little.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

I use an 80-200 F2.8 AF-D with my D800, and cannot find a good reason to sell it and replace it with a 70-200. I don't use VR, I don't find the image quality on the ones the I have borrowed/rented to be much better, and the focusing speed is not an issue. I have shot lacrosse and soccer games, motor sports events, motorcycle drivers at close range, etc - with no complaints. There will be many who will tell you the 70-200 is the best thing since sliced bread, but most have not shot with the AF-D lens, which is no slouch.