Nikon 70-200 f2.8 ED-VR II vs 80-200 f2.8 ED

[Masterlu]

The 70-200 f2.8 is twice the price, about $2300 vs $1200 for the 80-200 f2.8

Anyone here choose the 70-200 over the 80-200 & why?

[Still-One]

Originally Posted by Masterlu

The 70-200 f2.8 is twice the price, about $2300 vs $1200 for the 80-200 f2.8

Anyone here choose the 70-200 over the 80-200 & why?

I think the $5k model is a 2.0f not 2.8f. Also, the 70-200 2.8 is being replaced by a new VRII for about $2300

[Masterlu]

Originally Posted by Stillone

I think the $5k model is a 2.0f not 2.8f. Also, the 70-200 2.8 is being replaced by a new VRII for about $2300

Yes, the VRII is the one I am inquiring about vs the standard 80-200 f2.8

[Still-One]

I do not think they currently have the 80-200 2.8, it shows in their list as a 2.0 and that will add a lot of coin if it is correct.

AF-S VR NIKKOR 200mm f/2G IF-ED from Nikon

[Masterlu]

Here it is:

Amazon.com: Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Electronics

[Masterlu]

Originally Posted by Stillone

I do not think they currently have the 80-200 2.8, it shows in their list as a 2.0 and that will add a lot of coin if it is correct.

AF-S VR NIKKOR 200mm f/2G IF-ED from Nikon

6.4lbs

[Still-One]

Originally Posted by Masterlu

Here it is:

Amazon.com: Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Electronics

Yeah, I think that has been discontinued.

[1KW]

Ivan both lens are very very heavy and I doubt you will want to carry either one around after the initial novelty of owning either one wears off. A lens loses its value to me, if you don't have it when you need it. This is the reason I went with a 18-200 VRII lens. I have taken this lens with me to Alaska, Hawai, Europe and I would never have had the pictures I took with any other lens because it has such a wide zoom range. The other lens I usually travel with is a 50 mm nikor 1.4 which is very very sharp, also light weight and lets me shoot without any kind of flash. While the 18-200 nikor VRII does not have the same resolution corner to corner uncropped as either of the zooms you pointed out it is my 90 % of the time walk around lens and you can not beat the convenience. The quality especially with post processing with what ever software you have negates the difference especially after you crop the image. Back to your original question, the new 70-200 has had a few issues with focusing and eating up the batteries on the camera. The previous 70-200 and the 80-200 are about the same optic wise. I know you like to have the best but ask yourself one question, do I want to carry around such a heavy kit ? If you feel you want to have one of these super heavy zooms then I would buy the original 70-200 VR lens for under 2 grand http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Ni....8G-IF-ED.html

[1KW]

Here is a sample picture taken with my 18-200 nikon lens. I chose this because geometric patterns usually will show defects of a lens. With the VRII I can also hand hold this lens at night so the 2.8 vs 3.5 is a non issue especially if you shoot at higher ISO like 800 or 1600.

[Masterlu]

Quite Amazing! Thanks David