Thread: A quandry 80-200mm f2.8D ED or 70-200mmF2.8 VR II

I haven't used either but it will boil down to if you need VR ( vibration reduction ) & are had holding in low to moderate light conditions. Me, I would probably go for the newer lense with VR even if I had to wait a bit longer to afford it

Gary

Originally Posted by 33chinacars

Me, I would probably go for the newer lense with VR even if I had to wait a bit longer to afford it

Gary

Picture a 3 year old - but mummy I want it now

Most of my shots are with a monopod and also I am sort of wondering about the longevity of the VR must be very delicate stuff

The 70-200 f/2.8G VRII is the best there is in that range for Nikon. I can't justify upgrading my older VR model. The 80-200 f/2.8D ED isn't a slouch by any means but the newer lens coatings make a big difference to the light transmission through the lens.

One thing to note is the 80-200 doesn't have a removable foot. The 70-200 does and is excellent to handhold.

You won't be disappointed with either but if you have a D300s or a D800/E, D3200, D7000 or D4 then I would go the 70-200 VRII or try and pick up the earlier VR model.

Which ever you get, change the foot over to something decent for the monopod.
e.g. http://reallyrightstuff.com/ProductD...%2ff2.8&key=it and http://reallyrightstuff.com/ProductD...2-40-LR&key=it

Originally Posted by blitz

Picture a 3 year old - but mummy I want it now

Be patient my son be patient. All good things come to those that wait.

Gary

The 70-200 is my choice but before recommend a lens I would like to ask you which type of photography are you doing.
If it is in a low light or indoor sports the yes, go for a big aperture lens.
If it is for nature photography then the 70-300 VR is as sharp to the naked eye as the 70-200 VR at the same range.

For that reason and the value for money is that I have the 70-300VR a superb lens for less than $700
Cheers

Originally Posted by Chucaro

The 70-200 is my choice but before recommend a lens I would like to ask you which type of photography are you doing.
Cheers

Several things: my girls are madly into polox so a lot of my photography revolves arounds early morning and late afternoon fast action shots of horses, riders and the associated action.

A lot of wildlife around here is most active in the low light of morning and evening

And yes landscape photography

I want a lens that can do everything, which of course doesn't exist, my 70-300 is fantastic for plenty of light or little movement in the less light times but just can't cut it for horses rackets balls and the lunatics that use them

Good point, get the 70-200VR and later a 1.4 converter if you whish to increase the range.
The 2.0 converter will give you more range but at the cost of loosing quality and aperture.

The 70-200 is a no brainier except it is so much more than the 80-200 and is the coating and VR really worth over double the price

By the byes has anyone had a look at the new. 18-300mm VR lens it looks like a good all rounder - still going for one or the other lenses regardless