Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2013 · 80-200 2.8 2v + 1.4 vs 70-300?

  
 
jefflee
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · 80-200 2.8 2v + 1.4 vs 70-300?


I normally use my 300 for long shooting, and love my 80-200. At times I've used my KenkoPro 1.4 (bought just for the 80-200, have the Nikon TC's for the 300) and at f4 and above it is very good.

Is the 70-300 at 300 @ 5.6 as good as the 80-200 + 1.4 TC @ f4? The 70-300 are so cheap used, is it worth having one as a light weight option?



Nov 17, 2013 at 11:54 AM
ckcarr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · 80-200 2.8 2v + 1.4 vs 70-300?


For $300 - $350 used it's a no brainer to keep in your bag. But, mine is used only for unplanned long shots when my mission and equipment is wide angled landscape, or hiking, motorcycling somewhere when the camera is secondary.

It has adequate/very good image quality, but in my view - inconsistent, particularly with the newer high resolution sensors. But is not going to compare to any of the more professional lenses, whether 80-200mm, 70-200 iterations, 80-400 (D & G). With Nikon, you usually do get what you pay for, and then some ("Thank you sir!, may I have another?") Still, better to get a shot, than to never have the chance.

Truthfully though, I seldom use mine anymore, and may just send to my sister in Illinois at some point.



Nov 17, 2013 at 01:29 PM
OccAeon
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · 80-200 2.8 2v + 1.4 vs 70-300?


I was always disappointed with my 70-300 VR (and I frequently comment on these posts). It just wasn't sharp past about 200mm, even at f/8 or f/11, although it was very nice under 200mm.

If you have the megapixels, I would probably just use a crop of the 80-200.

Edit: I added pics from the 70-200 f/4 w/ 1.4 TC and w/o 1.4 TC. Either way, it trounces the 70-300mm IMO. These are all live-view focused, tripod shots with 2s delay plus 3s exposure delay mode, lit by a flash. The target was about 30 ft. away.







70-200 f/4 w/ TC-14E II







70-200 f/4







70-300 VR







300 f/4




Nov 17, 2013 at 04:26 PM
jefflee
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · 80-200 2.8 2v + 1.4 vs 70-300?


I had some time today and tried the 80-200 & KP1.4 on my D7000 and 7100 (previously I had used it on my D200). Even at 2.8 it was very sharp, maybe not as sharp as my 300 but nothing I couldn't fix in PS. At a half stop down it was very good up to ISO 3200 and even at 6400 it was almost as good. The KenkoPro is small compared to the Nikkors, fits in a pants pocket, so I'll just continue to carry it for when I need it. The Extra 1.3 crop on the 7100 just shines on the 80-200, so thanks for confirming what I thought after doing the tests today.


Nov 17, 2013 at 09:07 PM





FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.