Nikkor AF 80-200mm f/2.8D

Is there a L.A. group here for those who are Lens-aholics?

Keep wanting more and more lenses in my kit bag (now kit drawer).

No I have not master the last lens I bought, or the one before that, nor the one before that. . . .

BUT still I keep looking at lenses? I need a 12 step program.

. . .

the latest object of desire is the 80-200mm F/2.8
I read such good things about this lens.

Makes my 70-210mm feel so inadequate. Ten mm longer and ten mm shorter but somehow less of a lens.

I've read about the various renditions of this lens, and from what I've read they are all good. The more modern AF-S would work on both my D600 and D5200, the venerable (read older) AF-D would not AF on the D5200 but would on the D600.

I guess my questions to the group is this: What can I expect in terms of benefit of the big 80-200 over my older, smaller (and slower) 70-210.

Lower light capacity (although with ISO capacity of D600 is this as big of a benefit as it used to be?).
Beautiful boekh balls?
Increased biceps from carrying around much heavier lens?
Improved I.Q. (which I suppose it the ultimate reason but will I see the difference? Can you see the difference?)

I had the 80-200 AF-D 2-ring model for a few years prior to stumbling into a great deal on a 70-200 2.8 VRII Used it on my D7000 wit great results in sports, wildlife and portraits. Built like a tank, fairy fast focus and great bokeh. If you want Nikon glass and don't want to spend over $1000, this is your tele zoom.

singlerosa said:

I had the 80-200 AF-D 2-ring model for a few years prior to stumbling into a great deal on a 70-200 2.8 VRII Used it on my D7000 wit great results in sports, wildlife and portraits. Built like a tank, fairy fast focus and great bokeh. If you want Nikon glass and don't want to spend over $1000, this is your tele zoom.

Click to expand...

I do see that the Nikon AFD can be had for under $1000 (USD) on eBay (prices running abound $500-$750 for AF-D 80-200 F2.8). That 70-200 VRII is closer to two grand than one.

I do see that the other brands (siggy, tammy and tokina) all have lenses in this class, all sell for less than similar Nikkor. I wonder if the IQ or build quality is on par or sub-par?

Will have to keep eye open for a bargain I can't pass up, maybe on kijiji .

Iam usinf this lens on my 7000as well as my 5100 (manual focus on this body) this also lends itself to a TC 14 converted with virtually no loss in I/Q and only one stop.
Harle

Love my 80-200 AF-D, but it's going on the block for sale this evening. Been a great performer on my D7000, but I need to make room in my bag for new stuff!! Gonna go cheap, too.

*david*hopper* said:

Love my 80-200 AF-D, but it's going on the block for sale this evening. Been a great performer on my D7000, but I need to make room in my bag for new stuff!! Gonna go cheap, too. 

Click to expand...

So How Much? And where is this "block" is is going to for sale upon?

Fortkentdad said:

So How Much? And where is this "block" is is going to for sale upon?

Click to expand...

Check the marketplace thread a bit later this evening. I need to snap few pics so I can list it correctly.

There are so many variations of this lens. I did find good old Ken Rockwell's assessment of them in a nice historical chart
Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 History

Prices vary - a lot.

While the latest and greatest, new in a box would be wonderful, and my first choice, right after winning the lottery, my budget pushes me back to the legacy, vintage, oldies.

I see the Ring Version with the non-removable tripod foot commands $600-$900-ish while the push-pull older AF version can be had for $300-$500-ish.

From what I read on Ken's site (yes I know, I know) it looks like what you sacrifice to save $300-400 is the speed of the auto-focus. For those who have (or had) the push-pull focus version how slow is slow?

I have the push-pull 70-210 and find the AF focus speed fast enough. Indeed I keep asking myself if the IQ improvement and better boekh balls is worth the cost?

I will have some shopping time in April in Calgary and might have a few dollars in the fun money account burning a hole in my pocket.

In my MS Window Shopping I'm looking at a Tamron 180mm f/3.5 - it is SPecial. (Apparently Tamron's SP designation is saved for their best lens).

Reviews tend to be very favourable - to quote that beer commercial, those who like it, like it alot.

And the price is similar to the lowest priced 80-200 (70-200) F2.8 zooms I'm talking about in this thread.

I know we are talking apples and oranges (well maybe spartans and macintosh's) but I wonder how they compare. We are looking at a prime vs zoom and 2.8 vs 3.5. But both have nice tripod feet, that has to count for something.

I do enjoy the hunt (for my next lens) and someday I'm going to bag me a big one.