Focusing speed of Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 ED question

[ronald_smith2]

I know the focusing speed of AF-S 70-200m f/2.8 VR would be as fast (maybe even faster) than my AF-S 16-85mm VR,

and that professional tele zoom lens has my interest, but the 80-200mm f/2.8 ED would have almost identical

optics. Is the focusing speed dramatically slower than the VR model?

 

I am using a D80.

[franklin_polk]

On a D-80, yes the focusing speed will be dramatically slower on the AF-D versus the VR. You could consider the 80-200 AF-S (not VR), which will have improved focusing speed, but still be cheaper than the 70-200 VR.

[ted_springer]

Depends which D version you are talking about. The latest D version has pretty fast focusing 75% as fast as the AF-S version.

[peter_k4]

It doesn't appear he is talking about the D version at all... I have the first generation 80-200. It's been used on a D80 and D50. Yes it is slow, but really, it's fast enough for everything except fast sports, and it a fantastic deal. If you're worried about money, skip the VR one and get it. If you want to sell it 2 years from now and get the VR...you lose practically no money.

 

win-win

[ronald_smith2]

This is the only Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8:

http://www.vistek.ca/store/CameraLenses/133811/nikon-af-80200mm-f28-d-ed-macro-telephoto-zoom-lens.aspx

 

Is the latest one other than the 70-200mm VR?

[lex_jenkins]

I compared the 80-200/2.8D AF and 70-200/2.8 AF-S VR side by side on my D2H. It wasn't so much autofocusing speed that was noticeable. There was some difference but not really significant.

 

But the 80-200 had a lot more "chatter" and jolt palpable through the lens barrel and camera body. This is mainly noticeable in quick focus shifts at close to medium range, which would be typical of tracking along with indoor sports like basketball. This chatter, while slight, is enough to moderately disrupt a steady image through the viewfinder while panning with action. The AF-S lenses are virtually free of any felt chatter or jolt.

 

I've noticed this same chatter on my smaller AF Nikkors, but because of the low moving mass it's insignificant. The 80-200 has a lot more moving mass.

[ronald_smith2]

OK, it seems I may not be fully happy unless I spring for the latest 70-200mm lens - the one with AF-S and VR. I

certainly have ruled out the third-party offerings, too many stories of spotty QC. Too bad Nikon didn't make a

compact 50-135mm f/2.8 AF-S VR lens. Oh well.

 

Thanks for all your input.