Anyone using the Nikon 80-200mm 2.8d?
/forum/topic/1171468/0

1
       2       end

yoshidude
Registered: Oct 24, 2012
Total Posts: 53
Country: United States

Hello All,

I'm on a tight budget, and am looking to buy a 2.8 tele-zoom for my D7000. I've decided that the 80-200 2.8d might be my only option for a $1000 or less price tag. I'm thinking that I'll rent one before making a purchase, but am wondering if anyone is using this lens or combo in low-light gymnasiums or for soccer.

I've been following many of the topics and C&C feedback sessions, but this is my first posting. Thanks for your patience and input.

Regards,
Scott



kylehess10
Registered: Jul 19, 2012
Total Posts: 122
Country: United States

I've used this combo before - I shot baseball and some portraits with it. It was pretty sharp on my D7000, but even better on FX.


Here's all my photos with the 80-200 & D7000:

http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=53312364%40N00&q=80-200mm+d7000&m=text


And here's my photos with the 80-200 & D3:

http://www.flickr.com/search/?s=rec&w=53312364%40N00&q=80-200mm+d3&m=text



TFrazior
Registered: Oct 17, 2012
Total Posts: 91
Country: United States

kyle,
I also am using the same set up. D7000 with the 80-200 2.8 . great photos you took with it. question for you. are you holding it freehand or are you using a Tri or monopod?
Most of the shots I have free hand are very very shaky and out of focus.



NathanHamler
Registered: Sep 25, 2009
Total Posts: 2385
Country: United States

I used to have one i shot on DX...it's a nice compact lens.....i switched to the 70-200 vr1, which was sharper, but only by a little...i actually didnt NEED vr, and most of the time didnt like having VR activated, because in the split second it takes to stabilize, i found it would ruin more shots than it helped...i had to recently sell my 70-200, but when i buy another 2.8 tele zoom, it'll be an 80-200 2.8d...



fyffem
Registered: Aug 15, 2012
Total Posts: 23
Country: United States

I've previously shot with this on a D90, and now on a D600. Much better low-light hand-held performance on the D600 because of the higher ISO capability. In low light situations, I would recommend this lens on your D7000, using a monopod .



wellsjt
Registered: Feb 15, 2010
Total Posts: 309
Country: United States

I have the 80-200 f/2.8D (current 2 ring model) and it is really excellent value for a pro lens. Optically, I think it is everything the 70-200 is but it obviously does lack AF-S, VR, and the ability to use the Nikon teleconverters. But the price tag is right.

I use it on a D90 and D800. It focuses very accurately and quickly (very quick on my D800). It's just fine for handholding - as always, you need to have the appropriate shutter speed. When I used it for shooting activities on high school sports fields, I liked shutter speeds of 1/320 or faster when I was at 200mm for handholding. In these cases I preferred not using a monopod with it because I found that slowed me down.

It's a great lens and I'm sure you will like it.



pr4photos
Registered: Sep 17, 2008
Total Posts: 1108
Country: United Kingdom

I used it on my D300 and use it on my current D700. You won't be dissapointed, great lens



tswitzer
Registered: Jun 26, 2008
Total Posts: 64
Country: United States

I used it on my D300 and liked it a lot. I later moved to the 70-200 vr1 and liked that one too but, to be honest, I don't see much difference in images. For me the VR is not a big deal. I do like the manual focus override and silent fast focusing of the 70-200 though. I am in the process of downgrading my AF zooms to free up money for more MF primes and will soon sell the 70 200. If I were ever to go back to f/2.8 zooms I may very well get the 80-200. One thing to look out for: the Manual / Autofocus ring often cracks on these. Mine did and it costs my $150 or so to fix it. Not a huge deal but something to check.



TFrazior
Registered: Oct 17, 2012
Total Posts: 91
Country: United States

I do not want to hijack this tread but I do have a question. When I bought mine there was no paper work for it. M question is What is the Limit/Full switch. I think it has to do with Dx/FX but I can not find anything on this.



yoshidude
Registered: Oct 24, 2012
Total Posts: 53
Country: United States

Thanks to everyone for answering my question. I'm loving all the input. I'll most likely be going for the 2.8 AF-D.



NikonGuyIsHere
Registered: Oct 20, 2010
Total Posts: 258
Country: United States

Limit/Full just means how far the lens will travel to focus. With full, it will focus from minimum focus distance to infinity. With limit, it will limit it to a specific range for faster focusing.



trenchmonkey
Registered: Oct 22, 2004
Total Posts: 35615
Country: United States

TFrazior wrote:
I do not want to hijack this tread but I do have a question. When I bought mine there was no paper work for it. M question is What is the Limit/Full switch. I think it has to do with Dx/FX but I can not find anything on this.

It switches the amount of range the lens focuses. 'Full' is from MFD to infinity...'Limit' will be less close to infinity
and would be preferred shooting moving things starting beyond say 10'. It has nothing to do with FX vs DX.
edit: I type freakin' slow



techster82
Registered: Feb 14, 2006
Total Posts: 41
Country: United States

All of these shots were done with a D7000 and the 80-200D lens. While a solid performer for the price I ended up selling it in favor of the 70-200 for low light situations.

D7000 and 80-200



yoshidude
Registered: Oct 24, 2012
Total Posts: 53
Country: United States

Wow, these examples and galleries have really answered my question. While the 80-200mm 2.8d is not the most expensive or latest technology, it most certainly will work for my needs in high school soccer and various low light situations.

If there are more galleries or examples, keep 'em coming!

Thanks again,
Scott



kylehess10
Registered: Jul 19, 2012
Total Posts: 122
Country: United States

TFrazior wrote:
kyle,
I also am using the same set up. D7000 with the 80-200 2.8 . great photos you took with it. question for you. are you holding it freehand or are you using a Tri or monopod?
Most of the shots I have free hand are very very shaky and out of focus.



I've never once put my 80-200 on a tripod. I look at it as a freehand lens.



grenadier2002
Registered: Apr 13, 2008
Total Posts: 310
Country: United States

Check out http://www.keh.com/ for awesome used gear, used KEH for almost 30 years.



Weasel_Loader
Registered: Jan 22, 2012
Total Posts: 743
Country: United States

It was good enough for me on my D700 and couldn't ask for anything more.



TFrazior
Registered: Oct 17, 2012
Total Posts: 91
Country: United States

kylehess10 wrote:
TFrazior wrote:
kyle,
I also am using the same set up. D7000 with the 80-200 2.8 . great photos you took with it. question for you. are you holding it freehand or are you using a Tri or monopod?
Most of the shots I have free hand are very very shaky and out of focus.



I've never once put my 80-200 on a tripod. I look at it as a freehand lens.




Thank you for that info. do you have the AF-D or AF-S version of the Lens



EB-1
Registered: Jan 09, 2003
Total Posts: 22869
Country: United States

yoshidude wrote:
Thanks to everyone for answering my question. I'm loving all the input. I'll most likely be going for the 2.8 AF-D.


I assume you mean the curent version #1986, with the tripod mount.
I have one of those and the earlier version as well.
It's a good lens, but the late 1980s optical design is not quite comparable to the latest 70-200/2.8s. It is good on DX, although getting to focus calibrated on the D7000 was a major challenge.
I would not buy a new 80-200 now; maybe a used one at a good price makes sense.

EBH



equestrianguy
Registered: May 04, 2012
Total Posts: 217
Country: Canada

Don't forget you can also find the 80-200 AF-S on ebay for a good price too.



1
       2       end