Nikkor 80-400 or 70-200 2.8 ?

Hertsman

Hertsman

Suspended / Banned
Messages
3,243
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
https://www.parkcameras.com/p/3240409K/nikon-lenses-f-mount/nikon/af-s-nikkor-70-200mm-f28g-ed-vr-ii

https://www.parkcameras.com/p/3240494F/nikon-lenses-f-mount/nikon/af-s-nikkor-80400mm-f45-56g-ed-vr

Similar prices and would be used on a D500 (hopefully).

Not really sure if I need 400mm but its always handy. Current long glass is 70-300 and I only really find it lacking at Silverstone, which is usually an annual visit.
However, I do like to get pics of birds in the garden, and length is always needed there.

My head says the 2.8 makes more sense as hopefully it would be better IQ and I could use a 1.4 extender if required.

Thoughts ?
 
The 80-400 is used by a lot of wildlife togs and will of course be 'longer' on the D500 ... and you can always use the TC1.4 as the D500 will have AF enabled.
However if you basically don't need the reach then the 70-200 f2.8 is superb.
 
70-200 2.8 every time this is one of the best fast glass around by a mile
 
gramps said:
The 80-400 is used by a lot of wildlife togs and will of course be 'longer' on the D500 ... and you can always use the TC1.4 as the D500 will have AF enabled.
However if you basically don't need the reach then the 70-200 f2.8 is superb.
Click to expand...

I had exactly the same 'dilemma' as you and I opted for the Nikon 80-400mm 4.5-5.6 G ed vr which I bought 'as new' from MPB for £1069.
It suits what I do and it is great a BUT it is not compatible with tele-converters.
 
Mag1cp2x said:
BUT it is not compatible with tele-converters.
Click to expand...
It is with a little minor modification of the (1.4)TC.

I have both. The 80-400 is lighter (plastic) and needs better light. It's also slower to focus IMO. BTW, the lens linked is a D and not the G... the G is even slower w/ AF and I wouldn't recommend it.
The 70-200/2.8 VRII has massive focus breathing at minimum distance, but not a problem for me. I find it retains very good IQ with the V3 2x TC (400/5.6). For what you are mostly shooting I would probably go w/ the 70-200... the ability to shoot at 2.8 can make a big difference sometimes.
 
Thanks Steven.
Ive not worked it out, what would a 1.4 give me ? Nigh on 300 @ f4 ?
 
The 70-200 VRII is great and also works pretty well with a the latest Nikon 2x teleconverter. It's a versatile set up as you can shoot at f2.8 with the the 70-200 if you ever need to
 
So, just to spice things up a little.....

Which do I replace first ?
D300 Body

OR

70-300 Nikkor...

Over to you guys...
 
gramps said:
It is compatible according to Nikon's compatibility chart and without modification: https://www.nikonusa.com/Assets/Common-Assets/Images/Teleconverter-Compatibility/EN_Comp_chart.html
Click to expand...

sk66 said:
G is compatible, D isn't w/o mod; and then you have to be careful of elements contacting.
Click to expand...

I stand corrected. I was told that the lens was not compatible, probably meaning the limitations as to the AF, and I misunderstood.
I'm now going to have to buy one - so thanks a million :sulk:
 
sk66 said:
G is compatible, D isn't w/o mod; and then you have to be careful of elements contacting.
Click to expand...

Yes the D is an older model, not the new AF-S version the O/P is considering :)
 
sk66 said:
The link says G, but shows a D...

Edit: actually it shows both, but priced for a new G version... I think the first image is a mistake.
Click to expand...

I didn't spot that, yes definitely a mistake in the listing ... wouldn't want to spend £1999 on the old version! :eek:
 
sk66 said:
G is compatible, D isn't w/o mod; and then you have to be careful of elements contacting.
Click to expand...

gramps said:
It is compatible according to Nikon's compatibility chart and without modification: https://www.nikonusa.com/Assets/Common-Assets/Images/Teleconverter-Compatibility/EN_Comp_chart.html
Click to expand...

From what I (think) I have discovered is that a) Yes, Nikon 1.4 and 1.7 TCs are compatible with the 'G' 80-400 but with limited AF and b) they only work when the camera ((in my case a D800)) is set at f8.
I also (think) I have discovered is that a Nikon fit Sigma TC would be compatible, but would there be a very noticeable deterioration of the image ?
Sorry to butt in on your thread, Mark.
 
Mag1cp2x said:
From what I (think) I have discovered is that a) Yes, Nikon 1.4 and 1.7 TCs are compatible with the 'G' 80-400 but with limited AF and b) they only work when the camera ((in my case a D800)) is set at f8.
I also (think) I have discovered is that a Nikon fit Sigma TC would be compatible, but would there be a very noticeable deterioration of the image ?
Sorry to butt in on your thread, Mark.
Click to expand...

You will work harder with a 1.7 as that will take you over the recommended f8 min aperture setting for AF on the D800.
Not sure on third-party converters but I believe most have found Kenko to be the best alternative options.
 
Nikon/Sigma inter-compatibility seems to be hit/miss....more miss these days than it used to be. I have the Sigma 120-300/2.8 + latest TC's...works great. I have the Nikon 400/2.8 + V II TC's... works great. But neither lens works worth a damn w/ the other's TC's.

Re f/8 compatibility... the camera can be "set to" any aperture available, and you will usually want to stop down a couple to regain some IQ. That's the problem... w/ the 80-400+1.4 you're starting at 560/8, long end. But you really want to be at ~ 500/11 minimum. But you've lost a lot of light already and f/11 is already into diffraction limiting on the D8xx. Plus the 80-400 G is no speed demon. Basically, there aren't many (any?) situations where this setup will deliver outstanding results.
I have the 80-400 G and I never put TC's on it... but I probably would if that was all I had available.
 
I too have both those Nikon lenses. As a weight comparison the 70-200 comes in at 3.76lb and the 80-400 weighs 3.11 lb. both latest lens versions. Add that to a Nikon D800 with batt pack at 3.04 lb and you have quite a load to carry about. As for a like for like comparison would be tricky as both are designed for different jobs.

What iwould say is do not get rid of the 70-300 lens, I did and regret it . Me with my big thoughts decided that the 80-400 would be better but it is one heavy beast for me in comparison only having smallish hands ,hence onlyuse it with a monopod..
 
Last edited:
sk66 said:
Which do you find more limiting? Camera performance/image size, or lens sharpness/performance?
Click to expand...

Sorry, I missed this question...

I think the D300 is possibly a bit left behind in the arms race, so any new body "should" provide better images .....?

Higher MP , newer chip and hot spec AF for example.
 
Hertsman said:
Sorry, I missed this question...

I think the D300 is possibly a bit left behind in the arms race, so any new body "should" provide better images .....?

Higher MP , newer chip and hot spec AF for example.
Click to expand...
D300 is a bit behind now... Given the price of the 80-400 VR and 70-200 VRII I would think a D500 would be within reach. I would go for that first. If you can't get that one, I would have to think a lot harder about it (IMO the D7xxx series never really worked out that well).
 
gramps said:
You will work harder with a 1.7 as that will take you over the recommended f8 min aperture setting for AF on the D800.
Not sure on third-party converters but I believe most have found Kenko to be the best alternative options.
Click to expand...
sk66 said:
Nikon/Sigma inter-compatibility seems to be hit/miss....more miss these days than it used to be. I have the Sigma 120-300/2.8 + latest TC's...works great. I have the Nikon 400/2.8 + V II TC's... works great. But neither lens works worth a damn w/ the other's TC's.

Re f/8 compatibility... the camera can be "set to" any aperture available, and you will usually want to stop down a couple to regain some IQ. That's the problem... w/ the 80-400+1.4 you're starting at 560/8, long end. But you really want to be at ~ 500/11 minimum. But you've lost a lot of light already and f/11 is already into diffraction limiting on the D8xx. Plus the 80-400 G is no speed demon. Basically, there aren't many (any?) situations where this setup will deliver outstanding results.
I have the 80-400 G and I never put TC's on it... but I probably would if that was all I had available.
Click to expand...

I have now bought a Nikon TC1.4 II converter (my inquisitive devil beat back my sensible angel, as usual) and I am more than happy with it.
I have to disagree about the 'no speed demon' comment - IMO the 80-400 G is now slouch. Yes, I am sure milliseconds count in this modern world.
And with the TC (at f8) in the overcast late afternoon light the AF snapped in quickly enough for my needs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top