Early Morning Stonehenge

Early Morning Stonehenge

by Leah

submit your photo

Hall of Fame
View past winners from this year

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Take the tour ×






share|improve this question
Very similar to this question we just got asking a similar thing for Canon, although not quite with such specificity: photo.stackexchange.com/questions/17028/… –  mattdm Nov 8 '11 at 3:59
show 2 more comments

12 Answers

I can think of two possible explanations: 1. Probably, there was some misunderstanding due to the fact that many of the DX cameras, such as D3000 and D5000 series do not have an internal motor. As a result the 80-200 AF-D lenses will not focus on them. They will still focus on D90, D7000 and D7100 bodies. On the other hand the 70-200 AF-S lenses have a motor in the lens. So that even D3000 and D5000 series cameras can autofocus with them.
2. Another reason may be that full-frame cameras (FX) generally have better high-ISO performance. As a result, one can avoid a need for VR on a telephoto lens while hand-holding simply by raising ISO. On the DX the threshold (of poor light) when one no longer can hand-hold the lens while shooting starts earlier.

In the end, I don't think there is a reason to avoid 80-200 on DX. It is a wonderful lens. It is about half the price of 70-200 VR1 and a third of the price of 70-200 VR2. It is great for portraits and sports alike. For birding one will be better of with 300 f4 for roughly the same price (or cheaper).

Side note: the effect of hand-shake is proportional to the lens magnification. To mitigate it one should use twice as fast shutter for double magnification of the lens.

share|improve this answer
add comment


share|improve this answer
add comment


share|improve this answer
add comment


share|improve this answer
add comment


share|improve this answer
@Imre - I just had the same problem. 80-200 (the two-ring version) has become like a dream to me, I recently got the money, bought it and now, it's staying on my desk, prepared for returning. I have the same issue - backfocus. And it's really annoying, the fine tune is not enough (on -20 there's a little improvement, but far from enough; kinda good results are achieved at -20 and f/5.6, which is..). I googled about this problem and I actually saw, that there are a lot, a lot or problems with this combination. D7000 + 80-200 - exactly this body with exactly this version of the lens. Sad. –  Kiril Kirov Nov 25 at 8:44
Anyway, I'm not giving up this lens :) It's really, really great for the price, it's comfortable and super sharp. Yes, it cannot be compared to 70-200 VR/VR II, but the prices with these lenses cannot be compared, too. Unfortunately. –  Kiril Kirov Nov 25 at 8:46
add comment



share|improve this answer
add comment




share|improve this answer
add comment



share|improve this answer
add comment







share|improve this answer
add comment


share|improve this answer
add comment


share|improve this answer
add comment



share|improve this answer
I initially read this Ken Rockwell review on the 80-200 and there was a paragraph, specifically the "Not For" paragraph which caught my attention. I wanted more opinion so I posted a question here in PSE: kenrockwell.com/nikon/80200.htm –  Ygam Nov 8 '11 at 5:04
add comment

Your Answer


