70-200mm f/4 and/or 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6

Don Kondra

Senior Member
Greetings,

Being new to Nikon I did my research and purchased the D7100, 10-24mm DX, AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8 and the AF-S 70-200mm f/4.

My thinking was to worry about going longer later.

On second thought for a short time I could return the 70-200mm f/4 for credit towards the new 80-400mm.

I am aware of the weight difference and the possibility of having to use higher iso with the 80-400mm but I wonder if anyone can comment on how the image quality compares between the two lenses ?

Eventually I will be purchasing the 80-400mm (the longest reach I can justify $) and could take it for a test drive now while the option of trading in the 70-200 f/4 exists.

So I guess the question is whether or not I need both lenses ? :)

BTW - the 10-24/24-70mm pretty well covers most of my studio work and the longer lenses are for fun....

Cheers, Don
 

eye4get

New member
Gratz on the D7100! I too am new to Nikon and decided to purchase the D5200. I've hear so many good things about the D7100 for those who can afford it.
 

dramtastic

Senior Member
The ? is, for what purpose do you need a 80-400? I really don't see the comparison between it and the 70-200mm F4 that is, a long with it's faster brother the F2.8, a stonking portrait lens.
 

Don Kondra

Senior Member
Short answer is reach for wildlife and not having two lenses with so much overlap. I don't think the 70-80mm gap will be a problem.

Changing systems has caused me to take a hard look at my shooting habits.

I started with kit lenses and soon upgraded for image quality. Then when I purchased the Olympus 12-60mm I kept my 14-54mm but rarely used it although it's IQ is basically equal.

At this level with the Nikon lenses I'm assuming that IQ won't be an issue ?

I understand there is no "one lens does it all" but I can see the 70-200mm spending most of it's time in my cabinet.

The answer of course is to purchase the 200-400mm but that isn't going to happen anytime soon :)

Cheers, Don
 

Don Kondra

Senior Member
I thought some would find this interesting, a comment from an acquaintance whose work I admire.

I do have some friends who have the new 80-400mm and we've had a lot of discussions about the lens. Aside from the high price compared to the old version and the Canon equivalent, which seemed to shock everyone when the lens was introduced, the 80-400mm has a good reputation. It focuses as fast as an AFS lens should and people seem to think that it's as sharp as the 200-400mm f4 at distances less than 100 ft. What's interesting is that it is sharper than the 200-400mm at distances over 100ft. Apparently much sharper. (The 200-400mm is a world class lens, but it's quality falls apart at ranges approaching infinity focus. The 500mm suffers from this as well, but I make a habit to get closer to my subjects so I don't expect this to be a problem for me.

Cheers, Don
 

Bill16

Senior Member
I haven't tried those lenses myself. But @Sambr has taken some awesome shots with His 80-400 and if it's the same one your talking about, Sambr would be a great one to talk to about it! :D
 

ShootRaw

Senior Member
My take on this is ,you def do not need 2 of the 70mm-200mm....Return the F/4 one and go for the 400mm if it would be useful to you:D
 
Top