80-200mm f/2.8 lens

[roti]

Hi....anybody has any idea which make and model is better??Nikkor,sigma,tokina,tamron......pls advice........used to hav a nikkor 80-200 f/2.8 lens but lost it during a overseas trip.....now need one badly....

[rayman]

Hi Roti,

I'm currently using the Nikkor push/pull version. Very solid. Pictures are sharp and handling is great. Only complaint is the lack of a tripod collar.

Someone's putting up an AFS for sale. Take a look. If not, this lens can be easily found on the 2nd hand market. Worth a buy no matter whether you're getting the push/pull, tripod collar ver or AFS. Only thing is the PRICE...

If budget is tight, I would suggest you get the push/pull one. Works very well. Price should be hovering between $800-1000.

[kingpin]

There are 4 models of the nikon 80-200. Starting from the oldest: push/pull without tripod collar (no more in production- ab $600-750 2nd hand), push/pull with tripod collar (no more in production - as mentioned above ab $800 -1000 2nd hand), rotating ring with tripod collar (still in production - ab $1,650 new), and of course the latest AFS with removable tripod collar (ab $2,900-3,000 new). All very sharp. The best value IMO is the rotating ring version as the push pull version has some creep when the lens is hanging down. And you can get it new.

[Ian]

Correction time. (You won't like this)

NIkon have produced 5 versions of the 80-200/2.8 lens, NOT 4 as some alleged expert posters think.

Nikkor 80-200 f2.8 ED AIS (Manual focus) Push pull.

The original Nikkor fast glass in 80-200. Large, very heavy and optically superb. Produced from 1982 onwards, unsure of production ceseattion date as the lens is still available new from some dealers worldwide.

Nikkor 80-200 f2.8 ED AF (AF) Push Pull

The original AF version. It's well made, slow AF function, no tripod collar. In production 1988-1992

Nikkor 80-200 f2.8 D EF Autofocus (AF-D) Push Pull

Improved AF performance with essentially the same optical formula as the original AF version. Added D series chip. Lens is slightly longer than the original AF version. Good if not stunning performance. In production 1992-1997

Nikkor 80-200 f2.8 E ED N AFn (AFn-D)
Two ring version. Greatly improved AF performance, redesigned outer casing and optical train that has seperate zoom and focus rings and a good tripod mouting foot (non removable). Introduced in 1997 and still in production, favoured by professionals who don't need the speed of the AFS version below.

Nikkor 80-200 f2.8 IF-ED (AFS) Two ring

SWM internal motor, removable tripod mount, IF design. Larger and heavier than any of the AF lenses, this lens is still quite petite compared to the massive AIS version. Optically it's excellent and the AF speed is very fast. Expeensive though. Introduced late 1997 (dec) and still in production.

The moderator.

[Ian]

Quote: Originally posted by roti Hi....anybody has any idea which make and model is better??Nikkor,sigma,tokina,tamron......pls advice........used to hav a nikkor 80-200 f/2.8 lens but lost it during a overseas trip.....now need one badly....

Sigma: HSM / EX
Optically quite acceptable to very good. Good resolution and contrast, poor distortion levels, especially barrel and pincushion. Build quality is low and cosmetic finish tends to fail after 1-2 years of hard use.

Good for amateurs on a budget.

Tokina: ATX range
Optics are good, acceptable resolution, good contrast levels. Build quality is as good as the genuine Nikkors.

Tamron:
Not currently producting an 80-200/2.8 lens.

Nikon:
Nikon have produced 13 different 80-200 lenses over the years, 5 of which are f2.8

All are excellent performers optically, though in common with all large fast zooms there's light fall off in the corners wide open and a degree of softness in the image at f2.8 (this also applies to Sigma, Tokina etc).

Given the choice I'd take a Nikkor every day, budget permitting.

[rayman]

Woah! Thanx Ian for letting us know the history of 80-200s that Nikon has produced over the years.

Quote: NIkon have produced 5 versions of the 80-200/2.8 lens, NOT 4 as some alleged expert posters think.

Ehhh... But we're all offering our humble opinions here. So hope you're not trying to be sarcarstic towards kingpin cos he's just trying to be helpful, yeah??

Anyway, Roti, my version is the AF-D, in production from 92-97. Works very well. Creep is present, I agree, but it can easily be adjusted once you lift the lens up to focus. Anyway, it's good value for money. I got mine for abt $600 some years back. Must say it's the best buy I've had thus far and am EXTREMELY proud and satisfied with it.

Hope you have fun shopping for your new baby

[Ian]

Quote: Originally posted by rayman Woah! Thanx Ian for letting us know the history of 80-200s that Nikon has produced over the years. Ehhh... But we're all offering our humble opinions here. So hope you're not trying to be sarcarstic towards kingpin cos he's just trying to be helpful, yeah??

No sarcasm there, it's a straight correction of Kingpins factual errors. Sadly such errors are all too common around this site and online in general.

[kingpin]

I didn't say I am an expert. Nor did I say that it is authoritative. Sounds like u are saying u are one. Haha. If u look carefully I mentioned only the AF 80-200 that I know and they are all the most recent 4. Not mean to be a historical research. Can go on other sites for it. Your tone as a moderator is not suitable.

[mervlam]

duh... not to accuse you (Ian) of anything, but I'm thinking, is Kingpin possibly thinking about AF Lens only?

[YSLee]

Quote: Originally posted by kingpin I didn't say I am an expert. Nor did I say that it is authoritative. Sounds like u are saying u are one. Haha. If u look carefully I mentioned only the AF 80-200 that I know and they are all the most recent 4. Not mean to be a historical research. Can go on other sites for it. Your tone as a moderator is not suitable.

Your opening sentance appears to indicate there are only 4 such lenses, with no mention of AF only lenses.

[kingpin]

Hmmm agree with you. But that shouldn't get Ian all so uptight. Apologise to those on this thread if I had mislead that there are only 4 80-200 models. Next time will refer you to more authoritative sites. I will also preface with "As far as I know... or AFAIK...". This is to be a friendly site or only meant for "authorities". Sigh.....

[roti]

ok....relax la .....dont fight hor......we all learn new things today....i thinking of the tokina lens cause i hav tried it before....the pic quality is quite similar to the old nikkor push pull 80-200mm that i had last time... ......i dun how much is one currently.....??

[kingpin]

Thanks for the friendly pat, roti.

[roti]

Quote: Originally posted by kingpin Thanks for the friendly pat, roti.

no problem la...typing only la........

[Ian]

Quote: Originally posted by kingpin I didn't say I am an expert. Nor did I say that it is authoritative. Sounds like u are saying u are one. Haha. If u look carefully I mentioned only the AF 80-200 that I know and they are all the most recent 4. Not mean to be a historical research. Can go on other sites for it. Your tone as a moderator is not suitable.

Firstly I'm going to point out a couple of things.

When I speak as a moderator I post "moderator" at the end of a post, otherwise I am speaking purely as a contributor to the site.

I'm not known to be particularly friendly in many of my posts, if you misconstrued a statement of fact as a personal attack then it's a shame, as it wasn't intended as a flame (as stated in the post above), If I'd gone out for you personally you'd be in a burns unit at a hosptial from the intensity of the flame that would be delivered.

I stand by exactly what I said, namely there's too much inaccuracy and outright BS slung online, both on this site and web wide. I am not pointing the finger at you specifically here, it's a general problem.

Finally I'll leave you to work out if I'm an authority or expert on Nikon lenses based on the following:

26 years of using the Nikon system, 24 of those years in a professional capabiitity.

Have owned and used around 90% of the pre AF Nikkor lens line up and 100% of lenses longer than 105mm.

Have used around 60% of the AF lens line up at one time or another, and 100% of prime lenses longer than 200mm.

[roti]

Quote: Originally posted by Ian Firstly I'm going to point out a couple of things. When I speak as a moderator I post "moderator" at the end of a post, otherwise I am speaking purely as a contributor to the site. I'm not known to be particularly friendly in many of my posts, if you misconstrued a statement of fact as a personal attack then it's a shame, as it wasn't intended as a flame (as stated in the post above), If I'd gone out for you personally you'd be in a burns unit at a hosptial from the intensity of the flame that would be delivered. I stand by exactly what I said, namely there's too much inaccuracy and outright BS slung online, both on this site and web wide. I am not pointing the finger at you specifically here, it's a general problem. Finally I'll leave you to work out if I'm an authority or expert on Nikon lenses based on the following: 26 years of using the Nikon system, 24 of those years in a professional capabiitity. Have owned and used around 90% of the pre AF Nikkor lens line up and 100% of lenses longer than 105mm. Have used around 60% of the AF lens line up at one time or another, and 100% of prime lenses longer than 200mm.

wa....whats ur job??? sounds horrible to me....weight lifting??
oooi relax a bit la....dun get work up la...

[roti]

and Ian .....i think i can guess ur age liao from ur post.....

[kingpin]

Sigh ... which part of the world are u from. Does a taxi driver who drives every day for 24 yrs of his life, maybe going thru 7 different vehicles, make him a car expert? Does a 24 yrs career air traffic controller who uses the radio (UHF, VHF, HF or other RF) make him an expert on the radios? I'll stop here as I think this will degenerate.

[roti]

[Jed]

Gentlemen. Kingpin is right in pointing out that because someone uses a certain equipment does not necessarily make them an expert on it. But Ian does actually know what he's talking about, most of the time!

OTOH, and this is not intending to further press the case against Kingpin, but merely to point out another fallacy. I have no idea where he got a push pull with tripod collar from because Nikon never made such a lens.