Nikkor AF-S vs AF ???

[jody_felder1]

I was wondering if anyone could tell me if there is a major

difference between an (AF Zoom Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8D ED Autofocus

Lens) which is priced at around $900, and a (AF-S Zoom Nikkor 80-

200mm f/2.8D ED-IF Autofocus Lens) which is priced at $1400. Is the

extra $$$ worth the AF-s ? Thank you

[daryl]

Umm, Jody, that's something that you need to decide. It basically depends on what you're shooting. If you need blazing fast AF, then the silent wave is the one for you. Like if you're shooting sports or something. It also depends on what body you're using, and your fitire intentions in photography.<P>

 

I've handled both, but I don't own them. There are people in this forum with experience with both of these lenses. I'll let those people comment on the specific differences.

[erik_loza]

I've used both lenses quite a bit and own the AF-S version currently. Though they are mechanically very different lenses (the standard AF 80-200mm 2.8 Nikon package has changed little over the years except for adding a tripod collar, but the newer AF-S is essentially a clone of Canon's highly successful 70-200mm zoom), I find little difference in optical performance. The ring-motor lens is quicker and doesn't produce the standard lens' "torque" effect during focussing. The AF-S lens has its pluses and minuses. On the plus side, its circular diaphragm yields a more pleasant background than the older one. On the minus side, it displays some very pronounced light falloff toward the corners when shot wide open (gone by 5.6, though...) and it also seems a bit softer when focussed to minimum distance at 200mm than the old one. Both great lenses. If you're shooting indoor sports or photojournalism from a handheld position, get the AF-S. If you're shooting from a tripod, in a studio with flash, or candid portraiture, the old one is fine.

[efusco]

Jody,

As stated this very much depends on your needs and intended use. I encourage you to play with 2 similar lenses--one standard AF and one AFS. The difference is AF is, to me, astounding. AFS tends to be quiet, lighting fast, and, most importantly I think, the lock-on is firm and accurate. With my non AFS lenses there tends to be, albeit rapid, a more gradual transition from out of focus to in focus and often the lock-on takes 2-3 tries before it is perfect, esp. in less than perfect light.

 

If you're buying this lens new and can afford the AFS then I'd go for that. On that note, if you've got money falling out of your pockets, the new 70-200AFS/G/IDEF/VR f2.8 lens has gotten some pretty glowing reviews and gives you not only the AFS but the VR as well.

 

I currently own and shoot the non-AFS 80-200 lens on an F5 and N80. It is a great lens and I've felt no pressure to change to the AFS at this point, so if fast AF is not critical to your work then you'll probably be satisfied with that. If you're doing sports or lots of low light work give the AFS a hard look.

 

I think, optically, these are pretty dang comparable.

[jim_gifford]

Another reason to consider spending the extra money for the AF-S lens(or lenses): Nikon sells autofocus teleconverters that work with AF-S glass. For all other Nikkor lens types, you either get a teleconverter from Nikon that only works in manual focus mode, or you get a third-party teleconverter like a Kenko.

 

If you never use teleconverters this is obviously a non-issue. But many folks like the fact that an f/2.8 zoom still has a pretty respectable maximum aperture even after the one- or two-stop loss of light that a teleconverter creates.

 

Have fun,

[hudsonphotos]

I have an AFS 80-200 2.8 that is in excellent condition. I bought it last summer for $1600 and will sell it for $1000 incl. shipping. The AFS is not only a faster focusing lens but it's also a silent focusing lens. This was important for me becuase I was photographing wedding ceremonies with it and I didn't like to create a lot of noises with my equipment. Also the AFS will focus better than non AFS on digital bodies.

[kba]

I have the 80-200 f/2.8 AFS and absolutely love the silent wave focusing feature. For the type of photography I enjoy most (landscape), focusing speed is not really an issue for me. The main reason I prefer AFS over standard auto focusing is for the ability to override auto focus at any time by simply turning the focusing ring without having to flip a switch on the camera body or lens.