teddynate

I did a search on amazon.com and came up with the following information. Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras (
Click for product details Order in the next 25 hours and get it by Monday, Apr 28.
More Buying Choices
$599.95 used & new (23 offers) (92)
FREE Shipping
Trade in this item for an Amazon.com Gift Card
Product Features
... ED glass elements for high-resolution and high-contrast image even at ...
Electronics: See all items ). The email address is as follows- http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=tamron+80-200mm+f%2F2.8D+ED+AF+Zoom+Nikkor+Lens+for+Nikon+Digital+SLR+Cameras+

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

KEH still beats Amazon's prices...even with Amazon's free shipping...

ddonlewis

There are a number of great deals on a used Nikon 80-200 F2.8. KEH has 2 of them for sale in excellent condition for $286 and $364. This is the earlier version of the lens that does not have VR, but it's a great lens that pros have shot millions of photos with. EBAY also has a number in the $350 bracket. I do not know of a zoom that goes to 300mm that is a F2.8. Since your D90 is an APS-C it has a 1.5X effect making the 200mm a 300MM. If you wanted a fast fixed lens you could buy a Nikon 85mm F1.8 used for around $350, and it is an excellent lens. So for around $600 you could buy 2 excellent pro level lenses to use to snap your kids with.

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

Those are the earlier 1 ring (push-pull) version of the lens. Except for the one that has an aftermarket tripod mounting ring, they also lack that feature. As long as those items not bothering you, then they are another choice (optically they are identical).... Some people are put off by the focus & focal length selection being made by the same ring. I opted for the 2 ring model myself. None of the 80-200 versions have VR (the AFS version doesn't either...) Oh, the DX format camera doesn't change the focal length of the lens, just the comparable field of view... Another good,fast lens from Nikon is the 180mm AF F2.8 EDIF... I have one of those too & it is superb... I'v been taking many of my backyard bird images with it.[ ring versionsquote=ddonlewis]There are a number of great deals on a used Nikon 80-200 F2.8. KEH has 2 of them for sale in excellent condition for $286 and $364. This is the earlier version of the lens that does not have VR, but it's a great lens that pros have shot millions of photos with. EBAY also has a number in the $350 bracket. I do not know of a zoom that goes to 300mm that is a F2.8. Since your D90 is an APS-C it has a 1.5X effect making the 200mm a 300MM. If you wanted a fast fixed lens you could buy a Nikon 85mm F1.8 used for around $350, and it is an excellent lens. So for around $600 you could buy 2 excellent pro level lenses to use to snap your kids with.[/quote]

bicyclerepairman Loc: North Central Texas

You might want to look at this lens. Ken Rockwell gave it good reviews. It's not good in low light but it focuses really fast and it's sharp. Best thing it's cheap. By the way is use a D90, it's great.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/7021056.htm

teddynate

You can also check out adorama.com and keh.com. They sell used equipment as well as new equipment.

PhotoPhred Loc: Cheyney, Pa

B+H has Used lenses also. They have a used 55-200 VR for 119.00. You might want to see what else they have.

RJNaylor Loc: Delmar, New York

There is an 80-200 f/2.8 from 2005. According to SLRGear they go for about $900 if you find one.
http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/124/cat/13

I have 35-70D 2.8 and it makes lovely photos but the zoom range is faily awkward for my d7000 so I rarely use it.

I really like my 70-300 VR but of course it is not a 2.8. If I wanted to afford it and I was making money to carry it I would go ahead and get the Sigma 50-150 2.8 OS.

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

That's the 2 ring version that I have & that Nikon still sells as new... I got a bargain with mine, I only paid $400... I have that 37-70mm F2.8 as well. In both AF & MF models... As you said, it doesn't get used much but it is a sharp optic.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

HIGHLY recommend Sigma 100-300 F4 with a Tamron 1.4X TC best purchased from KEH or ebay. See my website for examples of what this can do ! .....focus motor built in for Nikon. ( I use Canon)

gessman Loc: Colorado

Pretending to know a little bit about what you mostly like to shoot and adding in the sports, which I have done a fair amount of, with a good zoom lens, I'm thinking that your 50mm won't be finding its way to your D90 all that often. I will assure you, in spite of all you have been told here that being a relative newcomer you will eventually find that you can use a zoom without VR for certain things albeit things with which you may not as of yet be thoroughly familiar. Chances are that you have yet to encounter many of the things that you will as you delve deeper into shooting sports.

Shooting sports requires certain technique and until you are thoroughly familiar with the possibilities in all lighting conditions, there are a lot of times when VR will save shots for you in low light situations if you are to keep your iso down and avoid excessive noise - times such as at a Little League game when dusk approaches and the lights have not yet been turned on. :D

texasmama

Some amazing info as always!!!! I've got a lot of homework to do..:))
Thank y'all so much,
Maureen

photoman022 Loc: Manchester CT USA

Depending on what you'll be shooting, I would go with the the 80-300; it would give you a bit more reach. My Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6 doesn't have vibration reduction and, as long as I shoot fast enough (1/125 and above), there is very little shake visible in the photo (even after I crop it). I am 60 years old and I notice that my hands shake appreciably more than when I was photographing at 20 (even 50!) If you have a 2.8 lens, you'll be able to shoot even faster than 1/250. I don't think you need to worry about shooting with a tripod unless you're shooting at 1/60 and slower. At those speeds you would probably want to use a tripod no matter what your lens setting!

gessman Loc: Colorado

Let me take a second of your time and unconfuse anything I said in that last post that might have been confusing. I re-read that and decided that I might very well be a drinking man after all. What I want to say is simple - VR can, in some low light situations, effectively provide you with up to 4 stops more light advantage in near dark situations. You can use that as an advantage in setting your iso/aperture/shutter speed combination to enhance your images in low light situations. It can mean the difference between hanging over the fence shooting low light action or sitting in the bleachers and watching the game. If you have perfect light conditions then you can get by without it by keeping your shutter speed above your focal distance but I will promise you that you cannot always do that and when you cannot, you will be shooting blurry pictures either from camera or subject movement. VR is definitely worth the money unless you know you will always be shooting action in bright light - guaranteed! f/2.8 in a zoom is also worth the money, inconvenient but worth it.

I would recommend that you ignore those who are saying you don't need VR if you set your shutter speed high enough because there'll likely be times when you cannot do that. They're talking about the hours of bright daylight and you will find that you will be wanting to shoot when you don't have that.

amehta Loc: Boston

We would all go with the 80-300mm f/2.8, except it does not exist. :-(

The only zoom with a fixed f/2.8 maximum aperture and 300mm is the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 DG OS, which is "only" $3600.