Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,559   Posts: 1,573,293   Online: 947
      
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Nikon Lenses

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    26
    Images
    5

    Nikon Lenses

    I previously asked this Forum about the difference between the 80-200mm F2.8 and F.28D. In talking with others they suggested checking out the 70-210 F4-5.6 AF lens. Any info would be appreciated, so as I can make a dicisson on what to buy.

    Thanks a lot...

    F

  2. #2
    nicefor88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Bruxelles, Belgique
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    250
    Keep your first idea, the 80-200 f2.8 is just the best buy. It's been replaced now by the 70-200 AFS. Some of them have a problem with the silent internal motor unable to reach infinity, or doing so painfully making ugly noises. Aaaargh! I gave up mine and finally kept my 5-year old 80-200.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Westminster, Maryland, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,504
    I owned all three models of the Nikkor 80-200 mm zoom. Other than the first model with the plastic mount for the front element which would easily break, always loved the lens.

    Now I have the 70-200 mm zoom. It always reaches infinity, and has never made an ugly noise. Great lens. The more millimeters the better I say. HA!

    I'm sorry our friend from Buxelles has had such a problem with the 70-200. Nikon should have fixed your lens under warrantee.
    When I grow up, I want to be a photographer.

    http://www.walterpcalahan.com/Photography/index.html

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    26
    Images
    5

    Thanks

    Thanks to all for your input, It has been greatly appreciated.

    Thanks again

    Frank T (photo144)

  5. #5
    PhotoJim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Regina, SK, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,221
    I own the 70-210/4-5.6 AF and the 80-200/2.8 AF (both non-D). The 2.8 blows away the 4-5.6.

    So why do I own both? The 70-210 is about a third of the weight of the 80-200. There are times when I would carry it and not the 2.8. The 70-210 is also dirt cheap. (I paid $55 for mine.)
    Jim MacKenzie - Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada

    A bunch of Nikons; Feds, Zorkis and a Kiev; Pentax 67-II (inherited from my deceased father-in-law); Bronica SQ-A; and a nice Shen Hao 4x5 field camera with 3 decent lenses that needs to be taken outside more. Oh, and as of mid-2012, one of those bodies we don't talk about here.

    Favourite film: do I need to pick only one?

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Toronto
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    13
    I has to be an exceptional non-ED lens to keep up with an ED lens. I've seen it happen, but most of the old lenses just are not as good. But, old zooms like Vivitar's Series 1 are a dime a dozen so experimenting is cheap.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    580
    In term of zooms; the 800-200 f/2.8 is great. I prefer primes. In that area I doubt that an ED would be better than an old one. I have both, but I prefer an old prime any time.

  8. #8
    SchwinnParamount's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Tacoma, WA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,035
    Images
    44
    Try http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html#top. This guy has an extensive review section for Nikon lenses. Another guy who can help with questions about Nikon lenses is http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikkor.htm

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    580
    Nothing beats personal experience



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin