whitewolfowner

Search for a used 1998 Nikon 80-200mm f2.8 EDIF Af-S lens. In excellent condition they go for 900-1000 and you will not be disappointed at all. Cream of the crop (with maybe the exception of the new $2800 one, haven't seen a reliable report on it yet).

2nefoto

Plain and simple, 70-200 (2.8) is the better lens. Therefore, two questions first do you really need a better lens, second; can you afford it. It's really that simple. It's your call

whitewolfowner

Better lens than what? You have to state what you are comparing the 70-200 f2.8 too. And there are three alone that Nikon has put out. You have to be specific if you want to help the OP.

I can tell the OP that the 80-200 I recommended is far superior to the first two 70-200 f2.8's Nikon put out. The first two 70-200 f2.8's Nikon out out get very soft at the 200mm end; far softer in the second one than the first.

2nefoto

The original question compared the 70-200 (2.8) to a variable 70-300. I saw no reason to repeat the lens size. Regardless of model any 70-200 (2.8) (my opinion) is better then the lens originally mentioned.

sterrill Loc: missouri

I love my 70 to 200. A great lens. Much more versatile than you might think.

whitewolfowner

I agree with you there whole heartedly. I didn't know if you were responding to me or the OP since you didn't quote reference your reply and it was under my response. Actually, tthe 70-300 and 70 or 80-200's are in two different classes of lenses and can hardly be compared.

therwol Loc: USA

I second that. It's the one I bought. Sharp as a tack. Not unbearably heavy for what you get. The only negative is that if you want a factory tripod collar (sold separately), it's overpriced. I don't feel I need one. It doesn't seem heavy enough to demand one.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

The 80-200mm AF-S should be avoided. There are no spare parts for the AF module that has a high failure rate.

The two ring 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-D is optically good. It has no VR and can be touchy focusing at near minimum focus distance. It is low cost but needs a camera with the built in focus motor (D7000 is fine).

The original 70-200mm VR is a great lens on a DX body. It vignettes to much on a FF body.

The 70-200mm VR II is great for FX bodies, and the new FL version is even better (and more expensive too).

For any of the DX bodies I would recommend the original 70-200 mm f/2.8 VR model.

waykee7 Loc: Cortez, Colorado

I bought the 70-200 FL in January and use it on a D810. The first time I used it, the results were stunning, and it's become my favorite lens. Thom Hogan says that if he had a prime that performed as well as this lens at 70mm he would think it was a very good prime; same at 135mm and 200mm. I agree.

So I've owned a number of old manual focus Nikkors dating back to the early 1970s, and 4 lenses for a Pentax 6x7. And I currently own or have owned a number of lenses for my various Nikons that are modern, autofocus lenses. The old adage of "buy the best glass you can afford" is fine if you don't have a family, mortgage, car payment, need for health insurance etc., but a health issue in January prompted me to buy 4 lenses, the 70-200FL, 24-70 f2.8G, Tamron 15-30 f2.8 and the Tamron 150-600 G2.

A premier lens like that FL won't make you a better photographer, but it sure will ratchet up your image quality. What I didn't appreciate beforehand, but appreciated on Day 1, is that the sharpness, saturation, and contrast as a whole different ballgame with a premium lens.

We all have our price points, above which more expensive lenses seem to offer diminishing returns in terms of cost/value. The 3rd party offerings from Tamron and Sigma are viable choices; we live in a golden age of lenses in which the pixel peepers may fuss over minutia, but the truth is the zooms today are quite good. I had an 18-55 DX and a 70-300 that I made many photographs with that I liked. Note I don't say "good photographs"; but photographs I liked. Those photographs I made with the D90 and those lenses still are photographs I "like", and while they don't have the IQ of my D810 and new lenses, most people I know look at them and say "man, that's a good photograph".

SquareRoot Loc: southeast Missouri

Over a year ago, I bought my 70-200 VRII f/2.8 used on eBay, wanting better baseball pics at night. Sometimes the lights at small-town baseball diamonds ain't much to brag about! But we can stop the flight of a baseball.
Taken about sundown; then an hour later.

(Download)


(Download)