Need Advice: Just one telephoto zoom to complement my primes kit

[scott_mcloughlin]

I'm really happy with my N80. I have a small collection of AFD primes

(24/2.8, 35/2, 50/1.8 and 85/1.5). I enjoy their performace,

relatively good size and relatively great value. (I'm also looking for

a good MF body for access to a few relatively inexpensive AI primes

like the 105 and 135, but that's another story and was another post.)

 

So I'm heading to South America for a vaction, and I'm thinking I'll

benefit from taking along just *one* good telephoto zoom lense (I

gasp!) along with a few of my primes (24 and 50 most likely). I don't

imagine buying lots of long primes right now, since 50mm and wider get

the most attention in my around town shooting.

 

Reading the posts and sites, it looks like some "classic" candidates are:

 

Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D EDAF ($900) or the

 

AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF ($1600)

 

Sure, therie's a price differeance, but any other thoughts or

recommendataions on the relative build quality, optics, handling?

 

Any other choices I should seriously consider?

 

Thanks

[bryan_lardizabal]

Both these lenses are excellent candidates and I have the 80-200mm model, and it

gives me super sharp photos. I would expect the 70-200mm VR to be equal in optics

but it has the advantage of stabilization correction and its price reflects this. My

question is do you like carrying a heavy lens? - both are not lightweights and can take

a toll on your neck or if carried in a shoulder bag. If weight or money is no object go

with the 70-200mm VR as it will allow you to get sharper images at slower shutter

speeds - my second choice is the 80-200mm lens. If weight is a factor, try the 70-

300mm AFD zoom. I used to own this lens but sold it for the more expensive 80-

200mm model - its quality is fine for images printed at up to 8x10 and the light

weight will be great for travel, they are around $300 and have ED glass for correction.

[bryan_lardizabal]

Scott, one more thing, the build quality on both lenses is the best - period! You can

also check the link for Moose Petersens review and test shots on the 70-200mm VR

at http://www.moose395.net/gear/mcb70200vr.html

 

Hope this helps...

[Jerry_]

For a trip, you might consider looking at the AF 70-210mm f4D~f5.6D Nikkor. It uses 62mm filters, and won't break your neck (or back) carrying it on a day's hike through town or in the hills. Unless you really, really need a f2.8 tele -- the 'big' Nikkors are a bit overkill for a vacation trip.

[todd_phillips1]

It's really a pity that Nikon doesn't make a modern AF version of their old classic 75-150 3.5 E lens. This would be my first choice, even the original, but I'm not sure it will work on a N80 (others can tell you). If it will, then that's my choice.

 

That said, have you considered a Nikon 1.4 (my choice) or 2X tele-extender for your 85? A lot less space and weight and you can still use AF.

 

If you really need the speed of 2.8, then I'd go with a 180 AF prime.

A legendary lens and you can "zoom" some with your feet.

[ist_petit]

I'd rather recommend a micro zoom Nikor AF70-180 if it's still available in the second hand.

 

Strenths

 

1),besides a zoom,you have a micro.

 

2),It has a tripod collar.

 

3),It has 62mm thread.

 

4),It has ED glass.

 

I am puzzling why Nikon discontinue it.

 

Cheers

 

ist

[john_n._wall]

Two other choices to consider for less money than the 80-200 f/2.8 (which is a wonderful lens) -- to stay with the prime line-up, take the 180 f/2.8, a wonderful lens, even better than the 80-200 f/2.8 by a little bit. You can get a Canon 500D close-up diopter for this lens and have great macro capability. Another choice is the 70-210 f/4, an older model lens available used, which is tack sharp, light, uses 62 mm filters, and only one stop slower than the 80-200.

[james_ogara1]

I second Todd's suggestion of a 1.4 x teleconverter.

 

Alternatively, the 180 2.8 lens is small and canonical.

[msitaraman]

You may use the term "canonical" only on the EOS forum.

[rod_sainty2]

Scott, why on earth would you leave at home your 35/2 and 85/1.8?? - there'll be great street scenes needing the 35, and South American beauties needing the 85, you'll kick yourself...just so you can walk around carrying a long tube of a zoom lens like everybody else? Wake up! Get a cheap 200mm f4 or a 180mm 2.8 if you must for those few distant shots. Get close, get involved! Cheers.

[Robert_Lai]

I second the 70-180 Micro Nikkor. Very compact, light, very sharp. People complain about its maximum aperture being f/4.5 at the 70mm end and f/5.6 at the 180mm end. However, most people probably wouldn't shoot an f/2.8 telephoto wide open, and will probably shoot around f/5.6 anyway. The good news is that this lens is sharp into the corners wide open at all focal lengths, and has no vignetting wide open at 180mm (slight barrel distortion at 70mm, minimal pincushion at 180mm). It is the ONLY zoom lens that I own. It was available at $650 gray market, and about $1000 US version. I don't know if you can still find it new old stock in some of the larger retailers.<p>If you must go with the primes, then the 180mm f/2.8ED is superb also.

[james_ogara1]

What Rob said.