nikon 80-200 f2.8 zoom

[gary_conrad1]

<p>

<p >I made the switch from Canon and its L series lenses to Nikon last month. On my Canon 5D I used the 70-200 F4L, and am trying to finding close to an equivalent lens if there is one. It looks like Nikon doesn't make this in an F4 (understand I could definitely be wrong). What Nikon lens (or other brand) would you recommend in this zoom range? Sharpness is my main concern, and most of my work is landscapes.<br /><br />If in your opinion the 80-200 2.8 is a lens you use for landscapes and think it is the option I should consider let me know.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >gary conrad</p>

<p >thecolorblindphotographer.net</p>

<p > </p>

 

</p>

[mark_s8]

<p>Gary, my dad just gave me his 80-200 f/2.8 and I just LOVE IT. Sharp as a tack, and just wonderful for landscapes especially in low-light conditions. I shot a bunch of early morning sunrise pictures in Mexico with it a few weeks ago, and I was astounded. I have the older version with the slide zoom ring. The newer ones have the rotating zoom right. IMO, you can't go wrong with this lens.</p>

<p>MS</p>

[anthony_bez]

<p>I have the latest two ring 80-200 AFD version and highly recommend it.<br />It has excellent IQ and build quality, it's one of my favorite lenses.</p>

<p>My copy has very accurate focusing, but some owners report back-focus problems. That seems to be the only problem that is reported with the lens.</p>

[rick_m.]

<p>The 80-200 F2.8 is manditory for any Nikon shooter. It is a marvelous lens and far more useful than your F4 was. I can't think of a subject, except perhaps macro, upon which you will not, at least in part, use this lens. </p>

<p>OK. If you want to pony up the big bucks on the VR or AFS versions that is OK but this lens will serve you well. It is built like a tank, tack sharp and color perfect. I rarely go anwhere without one of the bodies hanging around my neck sporting this lens. </p>

<p>I guess you can tell I think it is OK and you should buy one. There are no off-brand equivalents of this lens. </p>

[wpahnelas]

<p>i agree it's a good lens. i use it on D300 and D700, and it works well on either. it's not as popular as the 70-200/2.8 VR, but not as pricey, either. it gets the job done, though. i doubt you'll be disappointed.</p>

[brian_cheng2]

<p>I've been using a 80-200/2.8D with tripod collar on my D70s. A great lens. I will add that it can be quite tiresome to lug around and a fair number of times I've left it at home because of its weight (I admit I can be lazy about this too). Autofocus speed is a bit slow (particularly if you have faster moving subjects) but if you're doing landscapes it would be perfect</p>

<p>There is a 70-210/4 alternative that Nikon produced for a short period. I've seen it regularly on KEH for under $300 (used obviously) and it sports a smaller size and weight. I have no first hand experience with this lens however.</p>

[hawkman]

<p>I would be interested to see some samples from this lens on a FX body.</p>

[peter]

<p>There is an older f4 AF lens in this focal length range, and that lens is pretty well regarded as a cheaper alternative to the 80-200 f2.8 but I am not sure about current alternatives. The lens is long since discontinued but readily available on eBay.<br>

<a href="http://www.dantestella.com/technical/70210.html">http://www.dantestella.com/technical/70210.html</a></p>

[tri-x1]

<p>Big and heavy. For landscapes a good WA zoom might be a better investment.</p>

[james_symington1]

<p>I made the same switch from Nikon to Canon a couple of years ago (1Ds II and 5D) and had the 70-200mm f4 L too. Fantastic lens.<br>

In the Nikon stable the 80-200mm f2.8 is your best bet for landscapes if those are the focal lengths you find most useful. Avoid the 70-200mm as the corners are not good enough for landscape use (on FX; DX it is lovely) although many people love it for events, weddings etc.</p>

<p>I did a brief test of the Sigma 70-200mm on FX a while back and that seemed to be good too but the Nikon 2 ring 80-200mm f2.8 is still in production and turns out first class results.</p>

<p>It is possible to take great landscape shots with a lens of that focal length of course but if it is your first lens for your new Nikon outfit I would suggest a wide-angle zoom as being perhaps more involving for landscape use. The Nikon 17-35mm is first class (again for FX- there are other better choices for DX) if your budget stretches that far.</p>

[bmm]

<p>Gary - I owned this lens for a while and the posters above are right, it is an excellent, sharp zoom lens plus obviously the f/2.8 aperture makes it very flexible and useful in situations involving motion and/or low light.<br>

My only reason for selling is that I shoot with primes ~75% of the time, and not often at the long end of this lens' range. As such I was finding that the combo of my 85/1.4 and 180/2.8 was giving me most of what I was also getting from the zoom. Plus my preference is for smaller/lighter lenses which the 80-200 is not. And as a friend who borrowed it fell in love with it and asked to buy it off me, I let it go on the condition that can sometimes borrow it back from him.<br>

But be in no doubt that if a high quality fast zoom in this range is what you want, with all the size and weight that comes with it, then the 80-200 is a magnificent option.<br>

That and something good quality and wide (eg. 17-55 if you're DX, or 24-70 if you're FX) would be a brilliant 2 lens kit that would cover all your landscape needs and then some.</p>

[laurentlacoste]

<p>I won't add much technical information to whatt has already been said, but let me just point out how good the Nikkor AF 80-200/2,8 ED is . A fantastic lens that is now much cheaper than the newer versions, if you can find one. I'm surprised everyday at the quality it delivers.</p>

[anthony_bez]

<blockquote>

<p>Nikkor AF 80-200/2,8 ED is . A fantastic lens that is now much cheaper than the newer versions, if you can find one.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Laurent, It is still a currant model (two ring version), and should be easily available new.</p>

[howard_owen]

<p>Just make sure that you buy from a seller with a reasonable return policy in case you experience a focusing issue. I had threee copies of this lens and none were satisfactory. All other lenses work with my D200 body very well, the 80-200 AF-D did not.</p>

[bsd230]

<p>I used to have Canon gear myself and that is one area I miss. I miss the f4 L series of lenses. I wish Nikon would make an equivalent series. I would say the 80-200 is the only thing close in price in the Nikon lenses, unless you go to a 3rd party.</p>

[sjoerd_leeuwenberg]

<p>I have the old one ring non D version of the 80-200 F2.8 and I really like the Image Quality.<br>

But there is the issue of the tripod holder which this one does not have, making it a difficult lens for tripod use. I don't know if you often use the tripod. Some versions appear to have a bit of a wobbly tripod holder, there are also third party holders available that seem to be pretty good (but expensive).<br>

The different versions can be easily found online under nikon 80-200mm history<br>

Enjoy your new nikon equipment, i'm sure it won't disappoint.</p>