Nikon lenses - thoughts on this choice
Dec 13, 2016 13:39:29 #
I would appreciate your help. I am in the process of deciding which Nikon lens to buy. I am looking at the f/2.8 80-200mm non VR and the f/4 70-200 VR. The 80-200 is weather sealed and built like a tank according to what I can gather, but doesn’t have VR. The slightly slower f/4 is newer, about a pound lighter, has VR, and is not weather sealed.
Is the f/4 going to have a notable advantage over the f/2.8 other than the VR? Is shooting the f/4 hand-held at 200mm going to result in better IQ than the f/2.8? I understand the ISO and shutter speed aspect. Anything else to consider?
I use an FX camera, shooting most anything including kids playing soccer, equestrian jumping events, landscape, and street shots. If you own either or both of these, I would like to read about your experience. Thanks in advance. Dave
Is the f/4 going to have a notable advantage over the f/2.8 other than the VR? Is shooting the f/4 hand-held at 200mm going to result in better IQ than the f/2.8? I understand the ISO and shutter speed aspect. Anything else to consider?
I use an FX camera, shooting most anything including kids playing soccer, equestrian jumping events, landscape, and street shots. If you own either or both of these, I would like to read about your experience. Thanks in advance. Dave
Dec 13, 2016 13:48:33 #
I do not own any of these lenses but for me weather sealed is more important than the rest, regardless of the lens.
Dec 13, 2016 14:14:13 #
HertzSone wrote:
I would appreciate your help. I am in the process... (show quote)
The 80-200 is an old style "D" lens. Don't misconstrue that as a criticism, but it is important if you're buying a lens. It is built like a tank, and takes very good images. Just doesn't have all the features of newer lenses. Yours isn't an easy decision, for I would be inclined to go with the 80-200, but I really like VR and the ability to grab the focus ring to tweak the focus when AF gets done.
Dec 13, 2016 14:14:40 #
HertzSone wrote:
I would appreciate your help. I am in the process... (show quote)
In my opinion, if you are going to shoot action, hand held, as in soccer games and equestrian jumping events, the VR outweighs the lower f/stop. If you could use a tripod, as in the landscape photos, the VR is not as important, so the better build in the 80-200 at f/2.8 would be great. you need to decide which is more important. most likely, you will not be filming in poor weather, so the weather seal should not be that much of a factor. if you do decide to take photos in poor weather conditions, I believe their are sleeves you may use on you lenses to help protect them from the weather.
Dec 13, 2016 14:16:08 #
If you plan to shoot in extreme conditions then, of course, weather sealing is important.
For 99% of us, it's probably overkill. And even though f/2.8 can be useful, with today's high ISO capability cameras (I shoot the D810) I'll take the IS any day. In over 30 years as a Nikon SLR/DSLR User, I've NEVER had a weather-seal problem (even in light rain, sleet, dust, salt spray and volcanic gasses).
As always, your situation and requirements may not be the same as mine...but that's my experience.
For 99% of us, it's probably overkill. And even though f/2.8 can be useful, with today's high ISO capability cameras (I shoot the D810) I'll take the IS any day. In over 30 years as a Nikon SLR/DSLR User, I've NEVER had a weather-seal problem (even in light rain, sleet, dust, salt spray and volcanic gasses).
As always, your situation and requirements may not be the same as mine...but that's my experience.
Dec 13, 2016 14:19:35 #
HertzSone wrote:
I would appreciate your help. I am in the process... (show quote)
I used the 80-200mm f/2.8D lens for years. I skipped the first 70-200mm f/2.8 because it just didn't provide better IQ despite having VR. When the VRII version came out I grabbed one immediately. I've never used the f/4 version that came later.
Given the choice of the 80-200mm f/2.8D and the 70-200mm f/4G I'd be hard pressed to decide. I used to do a lot of low light event photography where the shutter speed had to be as high as possible and the aperture wide open often. The 80-200mm would be the winner for that purpose. But you aren't indicating that type of work, so I suspect the 70-200 f/4G VR would be a better choice.
I see nothing in what you mention that would make weather sealing a key point. One thing to note is that the 80-200mm has always had problems with AF at near the minimum focus distance, so shooting faces close up in a fast moving event can be a problem. Hence it seems that VR might just be the clincher, but you will have to make that judgment based on your style of work.
Dec 13, 2016 14:27:46 #
VR is a BIG difference, esp. if the subjects are mostly in outdoor scenes!
Dec 13, 2016 14:38:59 #
If you will be shooting hand held, I strongly recommend the VR lens, unless weather sealing is a primary concern. My percentage of keepers rose significantly after switching to VR and now I only use VR lenses wherever possible. My friend has the 70-200 F4 VR and I've shot with it - nice lens!
Dec 13, 2016 14:45:55 #
rjaywallace wrote:
VR is a BIG difference, esp. if the subjects are mostly in outdoor scenes!
True for landscapes, cityscapes and other static scenes, possibly including some Street Phototgraphy. In these cases a slow shutter speed might be desired, and VR would be very effective.
Not so true for soccer games, equestrian events, or anything needing subject motion to be frozen with a higher shutter speed. With any shutter speed approaching 1/500 the VR becomes less and less significant, and may even cause loss of sharpness.
That makes it a judgment call for the OP, as he is the only one that can determine if he needs one more than the other.
Dec 13, 2016 14:55:19 #
wingclui44
Loc: CT USA
The 80-200 f2.8 will last much longer, but the 70-200 AFs f4 will focus much faster! it's your choice! I like both!
Dec 13, 2016 14:56:39 #
I shoot in low light quite often. I buy lenses the are weather sealed and at least 2.8. It costs a bit, but that's what I use.
Dec 13, 2016 15:32:50 #
Another consideration is weight. The 80-200mm is a pound heavier at 2.9lbs compared to 1.9lbs for the 70-200 f/4. Tough choice.
Update: just noticed that the OP mentioned that.
Update: just noticed that the OP mentioned that.
Dec 13, 2016 16:45:38 #
HertzSone wrote:
I would appreciate your help. I am in the process... (show quote)
I own and use the 80-200 f2.8 AF-D lens, without the motor. It is a fine optic, and on a good body, the AF is pretty fast. It does not have a particularly short focus distance. The AF-D version is NOT weather sealed. But it is built like a tank. The AF-S version is weather sealed but they had lots of AF focus motor failures, and to my knowledge they are no longer supported by Nikon.
I have no experience with the 70-200 F4, but I do have experience with the 80-200 F2.8 AF-S, and both versions of the 70-200 F2.8 (VR and VRII). Optically the 80-200 AF-S is my favorite, but the VRII is the better of the 70-200 F2.8s.
If you are shooting action - in marginal light, there is no advantage to having VR. You want the extra stop of light gathering to use a shorter exposure. If the athletes were standing still then VR might help - it really just lets you shoot at a longer exposure without excessive blur from camera movement - it does not help if you are shooting active subjects, where you want to freeze some of the action.
Dec 14, 2016 06:07:15 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
I NEVER shoot in the rain or snow, most people do not photograph in the rain, so weather proofing is not important to me, I own the new Nikon 200-500 lens, it is non weather sealed. I have used it almost every day and I have had NO problems. Again, if it is raining, I and the camera stay at home. I have photographed for over 50 years and have never had an opportunity that I could not get by delaying until it stopped raining. NO big deal breaker. VR is not that big of deal, I photographed for 40 years without it and have received awards without VR. It is a great add on but if you can get the 80-200, and I am assuming it is the D version, that is a great lens with outstanding IQ, if you get a bad shot with it it's you and not the lens. Good luck.
Dec 14, 2016 06:24:05 #
You can always get a raincoat for your camera and lens. They are not expensive and really do protect you equipment from the elements. My D800e is weather protected. I had the opportunity of using the rain gear on my recent trip to Alaska and was glad I had it.
If you tether to a tripod the VR is not important at all. For hand held shots it helps a lot.
If you tether to a tripod the VR is not important at all. For hand held shots it helps a lot.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.