Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 ; older AF-S vs. newer AF model? Need some help Hogs. Searching for a used or new 80-200 f/2.8 Nikkor. In my search I'm finding a few of the older AF-S models.

devolution Loc: Dubuque. IA

Need some help Hogs. Searching for a used or new 80-200 f/2.8 Nikkor. In my search I'm finding a few of the older AF-S models. Prices used are about the same as a new AF model. Are these AF-S models better than the newer AF ones? I have a D700, so I can utilize both lenses. In my research I learned that this was Nikon's first attempt at a motor driven autofocus lens. So is their first Silent Wave Motor worth used what I can get a new AF model for? And what about build quality and performance? Thanks.

glgracephoto Loc: Arlington, WA

devolution wrote:

Need some help Hogs. Searching for a used or new 8... (show quote)

Ken Rockwell has a history list of all of these, from oldest to newest. He also has reviews on each. I know many do not like all that Rockwell says, myself included, but his lens reviews are pretty useful

There are most certainly some good and cheaper older 80-200 F2.8's out there, one still in production even, [and so not as cheap]. I am definitely looking into these for a future bargain lens with good quality

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/80-200mm-history.htm

glgracephoto Loc: Arlington, WA

I wanted to add that optically, ALL of these are very good. There are some differences as for correction of distortion, CA, and flair/ghosting, as these issues tend to have more improvements added as the models get newer.

devolution Loc: Dubuque. IA

Thanks glgracephoto. I checked Ken's reviews. He likes the lens, but does give it a few knocks, such as too much plastic used in the build .

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

glgracephoto wrote:

Ken Rockwell has a history list of all of these, from oldest to newest. He also has reviews on each. I know many do not like all that Rockwell says, myself included, but his lens reviews are pretty useful

There are most certainly some good and cheaper older 80-200 F2.8's out there, one still in production even, (and so not as cheap). I am definitely looking into these for a future bargain lens with good quality

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/80-200mm-history.htm

I agree,
I had the oldest AF version, one with the one-touch focus/zoom ring, and in real world use, couldn't see any IQ difference between it and the newest ones. (I don't shoot test targets). It was clearly slower to focus and I now much prefer two rings.

(Gail, Please use parenthesis() in your text instead of brackets. They mess up the ability to "Quote Reply" properly. I fixed yours to make this work.) :D

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

The "newer" AF model is actually the older model, its just that Nikon still manufactures it as it is a highly desirable lens to those who want the focal length without the VR. The NEWER AF-S model of the 80-200mm F2.8 was discontinued when the AF-S 70-200mm F2.8 VR lens was introduced.
Both the AF and AF-S versions of the Nikon 80-200mm F2.8 are beautiful lenses and very sharp optics. The AF-S will focus faster due to the SWM focus motor in the lens. The older AF model is built like a tank and will last literally forever if properly treated.

The first AF 80-200mm F2.8 was a push/pull zoom.
The second AF 80-200mm F2.8D was also a push/pull, but was a D lens.
The third AF 80-200mm F2.8D was a two-ring lens.
The fourth AF-S 80-200mm F2.8 lens was the SWM version.

I have versions 2 and 3 in the store at the moment.

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

devolution wrote:

Need some help Hogs. Searching for a used or new 8... (show quote)

I like the AF-S version more than the new 70-200s, but Nikon no longer supports it with parts, so it will be hard to get it fixed if it breaks.

Another consideration is the excellent 80-200 AF-D - no motor, still in production, and very sharp. Perhaps not quite as sharp as the 70-200 on paper, but for all intents and purposes there is plenty of contrast and detail. If you plan on using it with a TC, it won't work with Nikon's TCs without physical modification. But you can use the excellent Kenko TCs which will work without the mod. Best part - a new one is $1100, and good used copies go from $600 - $800.

RICHARD46 Loc: New Jersey

MT Shooter wrote:

The "newer" AF model is actually the old... (show quote)

How much for version 2 and 3

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

I lucked out. Ordered a used 80-200 F2.8 push/pull version for $400 version from one of the big, respected stores & got the 80-200 F2.8 D version lens shipped to me instead.... One sweet lens !!! The store told me to just keep it...I give them most of my business anymore...

Fotomacher Loc: Toronto

Here is my 5 cents (pennies are discontinued in Canada). I have a D300s and a D700. I was using the Nikkor 20-300 but found it a bit soft, so I sold it and replaced with 80-200 AF-D and 300 AI-s. I am extremely pleased with my decision. For those doing the focal length math, I have a Nikkor 17-35 and a Nikkor 24-70 and was never using the low end of the wide zoom range. For $600-$700 the 80-200 AF-D is one of the best values on the street. I looked at the AF-S briefly but they are hard to find, hard to service and I was not too excited about using v.1 VR. The AF-D is less complicated and built to outlive my grandchildren

adwlogin

I have the "Version 4" and really like it. I looked at the newer model that was a Direct Drive (No SWM) but didn't like it as much. My perception was that the focusing was slower. I use this lens on a D7100 and shoot sporting events at night and indoors. The lens performs very well under those conditions.
I am considering selling this lens, since I may make the move to Canon.

wizard Loc: Naples Florida

I also have the 4th version of this lens, and think it is a winner . Bought it used. Built like a tank. I find that the photos I get with it are tack sharp. As Rockwell notes however, this lens is big, bulky and quite heavy - not practical for a walk around lens. BTW: the hood for this lens is nearly as big as the lens itself!

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

I have had at least the last three versions that MT Shooter mentioned, and I kinda remember the other one, but that was too long ago. What I do remember is that they were all great optically. The biggest difference, obviously, is the increased speed of the AF once the SWM was added. I currently own the VR version, but I don't much care for the VR in this one and I've had some issues with it over the years. What I don't like about the newer VR II version is the lack of focus stop buttons, and that has prevented me from getting it. Although I'm not particularly fond of push/pull zooms, all the lenses made by Nikon were winners both in their time and now. I would not hesitate on any of the lenses MT Shooter listed. The only other thing I can add is that the first SWM version was a monster, physically, whereas the VR version was less menacing, especially when shooting children. Hope I have helped.

robertvente Loc: Holland/England

adwlogin wrote:

I have the "Version 4" and really like it. I looked at the newer model that was a Direct Drive (No SWM) but didn't like it as much. My perception was that the focusing was slower. I use this lens on a D7100 and shoot sporting events at night and indoors. The lens performs very well under those conditions.
I am considering selling this lens, since I may make the move to Canon.

Even after the D750 came out? You might reconsider that move.
Incredible camera. Of course you will have your reasons, just thought I would mention it. One amazing piece of gear..

glgracephoto Loc: Arlington, WA

GoofyNewfie wrote:

I agree,

(Gail, Please use parenthesis() in your text instead of brackets. They mess up the ability to "Quote Reply" properly. I fixed yours to make this work.) :D

Who knew? computers are so weird! Sorry, and I will try and remember, I always used brackets out of sheer laziness, I hate typing and do it poorly, and they required less effort!