airbiscuit
New Member
70-200 for me as the looks itself makes me want it soooo bad in the 1st place 
70-200mm or 80-200mm
- Thread starter spazzer
- Start date
- Status
have the 80-200 2.8 AFD....rate it as one of nikon's best glass for that price. much has been said and written and reviewed on this thread's question....so adding more might be a bit redundant. performance wise 80-200 is a wonderful lens, only lacks VR but hey....i dont miss that and for that price (40% less) ....i would rate it a winner for amateurs like me. cheers. 
have the 80-200 2.8 AFD....rate it as one of nikon's best glass for that price. much has been said and written and reviewed on this thread's question....so adding more might be a bit redundant. performance wise 80-200 is a wonderful lens, only lacks VR but hey....i dont miss that and for that price (40% less) ....i would rate it a winner for amateurs like me. cheers.
Agree. No doubt that the 70-200 is a better lens coz of its sharpenss and VR. But from a performance/price point of view, the 80-200 can more than justify it's worth. Money saved can go into buying other glass!!
Agree. No doubt that the 70-200 is a better lens coz of its sharpenss and VR. But from a performance/price point of view, the 80-200 can more than justify it's worth. Money saved can go into buying other glass!!
yeah i think wat u guys mentioned are rather true !
Just shoot at higher ISO.. no need VR! ;p
Good if you already have the 80-200mm, since you done your homework before buying.
For those who got the 70-200mm vr, that is for sure you know what you are paying for.
How many of you who own the 70-200 ever thought of changing to 80-200?
How many of you who own the 80-200 will wish or ever thought of upgrading to 70-200?
When handheld at your iso, shutter and aperture limit...the next you will wish for is VR. You never know when you will need it. Imo, if you can afford, just buy it.
For those who got the 70-200mm vr, that is for sure you know what you are paying for.
How many of you who own the 70-200 ever thought of changing to 80-200?
How many of you who own the 80-200 will wish or ever thought of upgrading to 70-200?
When handheld at your iso, shutter and aperture limit...the next you will wish for is VR. You never know when you will need it. Imo, if you can afford, just buy it.
longkangman
Senior Member
I introduce you 200mmf2 VR. :devil::thumbsup:
glennyong
Senior Member
Bro tltan, u are too modest...
To the TS... I am using the afs80-200 and I have tried the afd80-200. The speed is quite significant. I have also tried the 70-200.. The reason why i chose the afs80-200 is because i cannot justify the VR function for the price difference between the two lens stated.
If I am you, I would go rent a copy of the 80-200 and 70-200. Try it yourself and make the decision yourself. Without actually trying it you will never know what you actually want.
my two cents.
I still own both. I did not spend a lot of time on comparing them, but I can't really see any significant difference in image quality. My 80 - 200 mm is the original one-touch. This lens was solidly built, i think I can easily use it for another 10 years. I bought 70 - 200 mostly because of VR. I was quite annoyed that some of my shots were ruined because image blur. To minimize this, I need to use faster shutter speed, thus high ISO. This makes the images noisier. Also the VR lens focuses very fast because of built-in motor. Wtih the upcoming D3/D300, it may be less of an issue. I am not selling my 80 - 200 mm lens (more than 10 years old) mainly for sentimental reason. I would say both are great in optical quality!!! You won't go wrong on either one.
do u know of anyone who rents it?if have kindly leave me a pm thanks!
peaceofangkor
New Member
Image quality between the 80-200 and 70-200 AFS VR is not significant.
Once you start using a teleconverter, 1.4 or 1.7 AFS, the benefits of image stabilization become a lot more important. The 70-200F2.8 becomes a 280mm F4 or a 340mm F4.8 for the 1.7T /C .
I like the flexibility of having the converter, not having to carry another heavy lens around and to use the F2.8 when I need.
My Fuji S5 has excellent performance at 800 and 1600 ISO. With the 3 stops advantage of the VR lens; the combination works well for wildlife and costs less than a Nikkor 80-200 + 300 F4 . Ok its ½ a stop slower at 4.8; but as a 340mm combination its usable wide open and gives great results.
I don’t recommend the 2x converter as it degrades the image too much.
Once you start using a teleconverter, 1.4 or 1.7 AFS, the benefits of image stabilization become a lot more important. The 70-200F2.8 becomes a 280mm F4 or a 340mm F4.8 for the 1.7T /C .
I like the flexibility of having the converter, not having to carry another heavy lens around and to use the F2.8 when I need.
My Fuji S5 has excellent performance at 800 and 1600 ISO. With the 3 stops advantage of the VR lens; the combination works well for wildlife and costs less than a Nikkor 80-200 + 300 F4 . Ok its ½ a stop slower at 4.8; but as a 340mm combination its usable wide open and gives great results.
I don’t recommend the 2x converter as it degrades the image too much.
2.8photography
Senior Member
i find that the image qual of either lenses are great, and besides, the f/2.8 is really quite bright already. but the vr (i think 3-4 stops) allows photos in even lower light conditions. also, the extra 10mm focal length does make a diff (8%). the vr does make a diff, when u get a 3-stop faster shutter speed, it does 'make' your aperture sth like f/1.0, 3 stops less.
but then again it is almost double the price. so if u have the extra $$ u should just go for the 70-200 cos it really is much better. but if u just needed a great lens around that focal length, on a shoestring budget, get the 80-200.
but then again it is almost double the price. so if u have the extra $$ u should just go for the 70-200 cos it really is much better. but if u just needed a great lens around that focal length, on a shoestring budget, get the 80-200.
satan_18349
Deregistered
Well, the AFD 80-200 is good, AFS 80-200 is better and the 70-200 VR is the best.
Like that, must invest in D3 lor.:sweat::sweat:
satan_18349
Deregistered
In the next few years, lagi best one will appear.
Yayaya... even if you wait 100 years, there's still be a better one over and over again..
What people are asking is NOW, PRESENT TENSE.:sticktong
In the next few years, lagi best one will appear.
in e mext few years, even better cameras will come out...so does that mean u do not buy a camera cos of that? technology is always improving mah. :lovegrin:
- Status
Similar threads
