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.
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 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...
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 .
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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!
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.
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.
I type freakin' slow 
