AFD 80-200 A Dying lens?
- Thread starter Chris Lim
- Start date
- Status
How about TC-16A? I can AF even with manual lenses! (but with limited bodies).
not very sure my is bad copy or wat, but my 80-200 seems to have a pretty serious CA problem. :dunno:
One touch or 2 touch? My one touch seems to exhibit some CA but I think it is still quite ok.
2 touch. on normal contrast subject it is perfectly alright, but when it comes to high contrast... i gotta headache =x
I knew the Tokina one was quite bad and Nikon's is based on the Tokina's design. I only remembered shooting on film, the one touch was pretty sharp. CA wasn't that obvious because no pixel peeping then..
But later I did compare it with the 70-200VR using a dSLR and I thought it was still ok though not as good as the 70-200VR.
Not quite a fair comparison because the lighting changed..
70-200VR/2.8
AF80-200/2.8 One Touch
I knew the Tokina one was quite bad and Nikon's is based on the Tokina's design. I only remembered shooting on film, the one touch was pretty sharp. CA wasn't that obvious because no pixel peeping then..
But later I did compare it with the 70-200VR using a dSLR and I thought it was still ok though not as good as the 70-200VR.
Not quite a fair comparison because the lighting changed..
70-200VR/2.8
AF80-200/2.8 One Touch
The 70-200 Looks like it has a yellow tinge in it. Hmm the focus is a little back focused?
hey....thats a really serious problem u got here... with 80-200's quality it shouldn't have this issue.... maybe u bring it into NSC to question them?
As for the flare problem of the 70-200vr, i did encounter it once only so far in my 7,000+ shots with the lens..
An example:
well, i wish but warranty is long over since i got it 2nd hand. tho i love the superb sharp image even wide open :sweatsm:
Just 1 nagging issue to me is the AF-M switch on the AF-D80-200. Its broken..
Personally, I need to switch very often from AF and M, and the construction of the ring switch sucks! I havent a clue why nikon designd it that way.. shucks.
I dun really desire the VR, but SWM on all lenses would be great, for the manual override.
Personally, I need to switch very often from AF and M, and the construction of the ring switch sucks! I havent a clue why nikon designd it that way.. shucks.
I dun really desire the VR, but SWM on all lenses would be great, for the manual override.
not just for 80-200 only. all other nikon lense with the same type of af-m switch has this problem too.
The tinge might be because the sun just came out so the lighting changed or might be because of the filter. :dunno: WB is on cloudy. It does seem like a little back focused but I was trying out the lens quickly, can't remember where I locked the focus, I never had a back focus problem with my body before. The 70-200 was espn's copy.
Ansel
Senior Member
Interesting to note that the TS is selling this lens on the B&S thread. Maybe he agrees that indeed the AFD is a dying lens. :think:
For me, the fact that Nikon is still producing this lens is proof that they think there is still a market for this lens. And why not, what is wrong with it? Nothing! Why should it die? Well, maybe if one day, the sales of this lens falls below what is viable for Nikon to keep it in production then, maybe it will be discontinued.
Like one well known reviewer said, you need to have perfect handling to tell the difference between these lenses, ie, the classic AFD version and the AF-S VR G version. To compare the image quality between these 2 lenses is an exercise in futility.
You buy what you can afford and what suits your need. I bought the AF-S VR version because VR works for me. My hand is no longer as steady like my younger days, and I can see with my own eyes the difference between no VR and with VR, and I am willing to pay for the difference. That is just for me. If I have lots of money to spare, I will buy both.
If you can't afford to pay the difference, or need the aperture ring, or can't use an AF-S lens, or hates VR AF-S G, then you buy the AF-D version.:dunno:
Like in the early 70s when some people start to install air-con in their cars when car air-cons became available. Some people were arguing why do you need aircons in cars? Nowadays, it will be difficult to find someone in Singapore who buys a car and not want it to come with an aircon. VR will be like the car aircon of old. Eventually, all lenses, except the superwides and super teles, will have VR. It is just a matter of time.
For me, the fact that Nikon is still producing this lens is proof that they think there is still a market for this lens. And why not, what is wrong with it? Nothing! Why should it die? Well, maybe if one day, the sales of this lens falls below what is viable for Nikon to keep it in production then, maybe it will be discontinued.
Like one well known reviewer said, you need to have perfect handling to tell the difference between these lenses, ie, the classic AFD version and the AF-S VR G version. To compare the image quality between these 2 lenses is an exercise in futility.
You buy what you can afford and what suits your need. I bought the AF-S VR version because VR works for me. My hand is no longer as steady like my younger days, and I can see with my own eyes the difference between no VR and with VR, and I am willing to pay for the difference. That is just for me. If I have lots of money to spare, I will buy both.
If you can't afford to pay the difference, or need the aperture ring, or can't use an AF-S lens, or hates VR AF-S G, then you buy the AF-D version.:dunno:
Like in the early 70s when some people start to install air-con in their cars when car air-cons became available. Some people were arguing why do you need aircons in cars? Nowadays, it will be difficult to find someone in Singapore who buys a car and not want it to come with an aircon. VR will be like the car aircon of old. Eventually, all lenses, except the superwides and super teles, will have VR. It is just a matter of time.
Interesting to note that the TS is selling this lens on the B&S thread. Maybe he agrees that indeed the AFD is a dying lens. :think:
For me, the fact that Nikon is still producing this lens is proof that they think there is still a market for this lens. And why not, what is wrong with it? Nothing! Why should it die? Well, maybe if one day, the sales of this lens falls below what is viable for Nikon to keep it in production then, maybe it will be discontinued.
Like one well known reviewer said, you need to have perfect handling to tell the difference between these lenses, ie, the classic AFD version and the AF-S VR G version. To compare the image quality between these 2 lenses is an exercise in futility.
You buy what you can afford and what suits your need. I bought the AF-S VR version because VR works for me. My hand is no longer as steady like my younger days, and I can see with my own eyes the difference between no VR and with VR, and I am willing to pay for the difference. That is just for me. If I have lots of money to spare, I will buy both.
If you can't afford to pay the difference, or need the aperture ring, or can't use an AF-S lens, or hates VR AF-S G, then you buy the AF-D version.:dunno:
Like in the early 70s when some people start to install air-con in their cars when car air-cons became available. Some people were arguing why do you need aircons in cars? Nowadays, it will be difficult to find someone in Singapore who buys a car and not want it to come with an aircon. VR will be like the car aircon of old. Eventually, all lenses, except the superwides and super teles, will have VR. It is just a matter of time.
Along the same lines, ABS systems for my generation...the brakes might be the same, but the foot..... can never be faster than the ABS
........VR rules, esp at the telephoto range, period!!
(jus a personal opinion)
I'm not selling cos i think its a dying lens Ansel. I'm selling it cos its a very good lens thats very underused and sitting in my dri cabi. So may as well sell it to someone who has better use of it. And allow myself to invest in ranges that are more practical to my photography.
- Status
