Nikon 80-200Mm F2.8Ed Af Zoom Nikkor D

Product Information

Which 80-200 f/2.8 D is yours? The older 'single ring' or the newer 'two rings'? I have the former, however optical formula and image quality look like to be the same. This piece of optics is built to last ages - the body is thik metal, front element is recessed and ths protected by the same metal shell. I avoided shooting at F2.8 on the long end. Overall contrast was clearly lower as well as sharpness. Not particularly in the corners. My 80-200 seemed pretty consistent corner to corner. The lens changed character by F3.5, so I just generally tried to shoot it at F3.5 or F4 when not going for more depth of field. At F4 is was fine, and I'd expect it to still be fine on a D800 or D7100's pixel density. But which one? there are 4 versions, all available second hand at very different prices, I have read through all sorts of comparisons and K.R. rant, photozone and I'm totally confused.com third choice: version 2: same optics as version 1/3, somewhat fast AF, focus limiter switch, no tripod mount, push-pull

If you don't need fast auto focus (for instance, for tripod shots with a D3x), Nikon makes no better tele zoom, even today. Macro: Nikon plays a joke here, as there is no special macro range, just an orange band on the focus scale between 6 feet and 5 feet. I'll explain more later under Macro.This lens is completely mechanical. There is no delicate AF-S motor to die (a common problem over the years in Nikon lenses), and there is also no VR mechanism to break after a couple of decades of use. Its only vice is that the corners are never super-duper sharp for landscape photographers at the 200mm end, but these lenses have always been for sports, low light and portraits, not tripods. What's really important is that the corners are now as super-sharp as all the other lenses, not slightly duller as was the previous VR lens at 200mm. The Nikon 80-200's collar never comes off, which is good, because it's so well designed that you'll never want to remove it. Flip it out of the way for hand-held shooting, and it's still there when you need it. But then, the current Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8 G is just way beyond what i can afford. So, I looked for some cheaper alternative.

Mike Otley's shot says more than a 100 words. And Mike, I can understand your philosophy, the eye is best at focusing. I have read in other forums that the AFS is prone to motor failure and apart from the price that puts me off. The last few of these to leave the production line were updated to "D," as seen on their identity plates. Nikon had made over 300,000 of these as of 2013, and they were sold new through the end of 2020. By mid-February 2021 they were no longer sold new. There can be some green ghosts, even with the sun outside your image. Use your hand to shield the lens, and watch your finder if the sun is in the image. Newer lenses add features like "D" distance coupling for slightly more accurate metering, especially with flash, or they autofocus much faster, or they add image stabilization (VR).Zoom is push-pull. The overall length doesn't change (handjob style zooming) and the filter doesn't rotate either during zooming. Breathing. I intend to use my lens in the tropics and that means a lot of moist air. All zooming is internal with the 80-200 so breathing will only occur in the focusing elements and this is a fairly small movement. On the 18-200 the zoom accounts for an extension of several inches, so I reasoned that this would mean the intake of a fair amount of moist air and the longer term risk of fungal growth. Although the VR is said to give 4 stops advantage over a similar lens, this advantage becomes minimal when you consider that the VR needs to be stopped down to f8 or f11 before it appears to deliver its best definition. On the other hand my 80-200 is very sharp from f4 so I reasoned that this took care of two or three stops advantage straight away.