Nikkor: 70-200 f/2.8 VR or 80-400 f/4.5-5.6 VR?

King_Boru

King_Boru

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,097
Edit My Images
No
Hey all,

REPHRASED: Narrowing down options for a tele-zoom (high quality) for the Nikon mount compared to other systems as a possible move might go ahead.

They will be used for aviation photography mainly as my 24-120VR covers nearly all, if not ALL my day to day work. In this type of photography (aviation) you are generally shooting from f/8 to f/11. This on most lenses, including budget, is a the lenses sharpest aperture so the differences between them can become negligible/not even visible to the eye.

So, the 70-200: Has it really got the reach I need? I find myself shooting at 300mm most of the time and still having to crop quite a bit. Would this be overcome by using a 2x tele-converter at the cost of image degradation? This in turn bumping the price to approx. £1400 which is over budget.

The 80-400: Not an f/2.8. Would I really use f/2.8? I don't think so but then there are always times you need it,... I have wanted to get into street photography for a while and this where the f/2.8 shines. BUT that little bit of street photography doesn't really compare to the amount of aviation work I do. Yes it doesn't have AFS but the D200's motor drive and focus system is more than capable to deliver the goods. 400mm with VR is going to be absolutely superb, can just picture those full frame shots now without having to crop! The slower variable aperture doesn't bother me profusely either.

Just wanted to know your thoughts really as this will be a very important purchase for me...

Cheers lads/ladies.

King.
 
Chillimonster said:
Thought you were thinking of switching systems to an Olympus?
Click to expand...

Still thinking. Waiting patiently for the E-610/E-Pro/P-1 specs. Then I am weighing up lens options. Then costs.

This is all part of one big plan. Should rephrase the opening sentence (now rephrased).

:woot:
 
paul cull-pearce said:
Have a look here...www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/80400vr.htm :D

Paul
Click to expand...

Very interesting. I mainly noted this:

Focus Accuracy

Focus is always dead on. This is very important.

Focus tracking in C (continuous tracking) focus mode is also great. I can photograph moving objects and the focus is also dead on at full aperture.
Click to expand...

As the majority of aviation work is done in AF-C focus mode the 'slow' focus 80-400 VR doesn't sound as bad as one thinks. Either that or I am missing the point,...

King.
 
The 80-400mm VR has issues with focussing in that it tends to hunt and is slow, the 70-200mm is a cracking lens so you could use a 1.4 or even 1.7 TC to get your focal length, still have VR and fast AF.

Have you considered the Sigma 120-300mm, it's supposed to be a very good lens.
 
Hacker said:
The 80-400mm VR has issues with focussing in that it tends to hunt and is slow, the 70-200mm is a cracking lens so you could use a 1.4 or even 1.7 TC to get your focal length, still have VR and fast AF.

Have you considered the Sigma 120-300mm, it's supposed to be a very good lens.
Click to expand...

I really want something with VR. Having used VR for a few weeks now in my 24-120VR I have realized that it is really quite handy.

As everyone seems to be pointing me away from the 80-400 then I think the 70-200 is edging its way up the table.

*Logs on to HSBC internet banking and juggle funds*

King.
 
I already have the 80 - 400mm KB and TBH if I was given the choice again I think I would jump at the chance of having the 70 - 200mm instead ... :shrug:

The 80 - 400 is quite heavy and although the focus is spot on it can be prone to hunt more than is comfortable imgo ... :suspect: ... frankly I have never really got on with it and it is probably the least used item in my bag ... ;)




Anyone want to buy a Nikkor 80 - 400mm VR ... :D






:p
 
£20?

And a pint of green Creme de Menthe.
 
1524.gif
@ your SoH Colin ... :lol:










Nearly bit your hand off then ... but only for the Green stuff ... :D



:p
 
I have the 70-200mm and use it with a 1.7x TC. I got the pair in Hong Kong for under £1000 all in.

I have tried the 80-400mm out and it is not nearly as good a lens. The AF is so much more responsive ont he 70-200mm (although it tends to hunt a little bit more when you use a TC than if you don't).

That said, I have tried aviation photography with it and don't think it has quite the length needed.

I'd be tempted to check out the sigma lens mentioned above, if I were you.. (although the 70-200mm is an AMAZING lens and one definitely worth having in your kit bag)
 
Hacker said:
The 80-400mm VR has issues with focussing in that it tends to hunt and is slow, the 70-200mm is a cracking lens so you could use a 1.4 or even 1.7 TC to get your focal length, still have VR and fast AF.

Have you considered the Sigma 120-300mm, it's supposed to be a very good lens.
Click to expand...

Almost an exact copy of my post above! :lol:
 
We've now binned all the 80-400's we bought - sent them all back to Nikon for disposal - they were rubbish - hunted badly in anything but perfect light conditions and the gen.2 VR wasn't all that good either. All have now been replaced by the new 70-200 VR f/2.8 lenses and a x2 converter. Much better. Gen.4 VR works perfectly - I can hand-hold down to 1/15 sec wide open at 200 if I'm careful - subject blur is now the only real problem.
 
Arkady said:
We've now binned all the 80-400's we bought - sent them all back to Nikon for disposal - they were rubbish - hunted badly in anything but perfect light conditions and the gen.2 VR wasn't all that good either. All have now been replaced by the new 70-200 VR f/2.8 lenses and a x2 converter. Much better. Gen.4 VR works perfectly - I can hand-hold down to 1/15 sec wide open at 200 if I'm careful - subject blur is now the only real problem.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. I know you use your 70-200 in very adverse weather conditions (desert, etc) being an army tog. How does it stand up to the elements?

Coupled with my D200 a wether resistance setup for aviation work in the UK could come in handy for all those rainy days,...

For now, I treated myself to 1.4x EX DG converter for my 100-300 f/4. Making it a 140-420 f/5.6. Will see how it handles Duxford this weekend (on a monopod) and decide from there.

Many thanks for the input guys.

King.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top