User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  0
Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 ED + Nikon 1.4 TC = Nikon 300 f/4?

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    26 Sep 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    202
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 ED + Nikon 1.4 TC = Nikon 300 f/4?

    Hi guys,
    a member of my camera club offered a Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 for sale for just $550 and I am very tempted to buy it.
    I currently own a Nikon 300 f/4 that I use all too rarely and I already have a Nikon 1.4 TC. So I was wondering if I should sell the 300, and buy the 80-200 and if I need the reach of a 300, I could just use the TC.
    I think I would get a lot more value out of the 80-200, the 300 just collects dust.
    Overall I should even make some money back, as I could sell the 300 f/4 for more than $500 for sure....
    What are your thoughts?

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    26 May 2008
    Location
    Launceston
    Posts
    2,014
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If it's a club member, see if you can try it out with the tc and compare IQ of both options.

  3. #3
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,209
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    I have a 70-200 and the 300 f4. I tend to use the 70-200 more as it can be a walk around lens for candids etc, the zoom factor being handy.
    "It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro

    Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
    Nikon, etc!

    RICK
    My Photography

  4. #4
    A royal pain in the bum! arthurking83's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Jun 2006
    Location
    the worst house, in the best street
    Posts
    7,740
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Which version of the 80-200/2.8 is he selling.

    If it's the push-pull type, they are(or can be) 'annoying' to use if you've only ever grown up with normal zoom action(two ring) lenses.

    My recent memory of the 80-200/2.8(new AF-D model) was that the reality is that over 135mm, it's really an f/4 lens, if you want super crisp sharp images.
    70-135mm at f/2.8 was close to faultless, when shot right, but more than that, and it slowly degraded.
    Add a TC and of course you'll lose even more IQ.. end result, is that if you want close to 300mm and f/4(with high image quality) the 300/4 is a better option(is yours an AF-S model?)

    Tammy 70-200/2.8 is better at f/2.8 at longer focal lengths... focus ring won't break on 'ya either (80-200/2.8 two ring models are notorious for breaking the M-A switch ring!)

    if you can stretch the budget, a 70-200/2.8 + tc will be a lot nicer in terms of IQ.

    FWIW, the push-pull version of the 80-200/2.8 is generally worth approx $600(and I nearly got myself a set of 5 of 'em for >$1500 a few years ago... didn't keep a close enough eye on my ebay account )
    Nikon D800E, D300, D70s
    {Nikon} -> 50/1.2 : 500/8(CPU'd) : 105/2.8VR Micro : 180/2.8ais : 105mm f/1.8ais : 24mm/2ais
    {Sigma}; ->10-20/4-5.6 : 50/1.4 : 12-24/4.5-5.6II : 150-600mm|S
    {Tamron}; -> 17-50/2.8 : 28-75/2.8 : 70-200/2.8 : 300/2.8 SP MF : 24-70/2.8VC


  5. #5
    Account Closed Wayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    07 Dec 2009
    Location
    Eastside
    Posts
    1,639
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If the 80-200 is an AF-S it will work with the TC-14EII (assume you have that TC) but if it is an older AF 80-200 you can use the older TC, but they don't allow AF.

  6. #6
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    26 Sep 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    202
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The version for sale is the two ringed version.

  7. #7
    A royal pain in the bum! arthurking83's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Jun 2006
    Location
    the worst house, in the best street
    Posts
    7,740
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Could be worth having then!!

    I personally wouldn't substitute a 300/4 with an 80-200AF-D/2.8+TC combo(although the AF-S version is said to be a lot sharper) for use at longer focal lengths.

    As it is, on it's own, I reckon this lens is one of Nikon's finest portrait zoom lenses, if you want smooth-ish well toned skin tones straight out of camera. It has a slight dreamy/hazy feel to it, and you can still resolve enough sharpness from it for eyelashes and eye detail, but you won't need to get too heavy handed with the skin smothering tools in PS.
    Best bokeh of any Nikon zoom lens, that I've seen
    (I think, in most of the images I've seen, better than the 70-200VR)
    The only aspect of replacing mine with the Tammy equivalent, is that portraits are now not as nice, as with the Nikon(but I rarely do portraits).

    I hope I haven't put you off it, because that's not my intent!! It's a solid tank like lens, compared to the cheapness of the Tammy that is, but my priority is overall IQ and super build quality isn't high on my list of things I need from a lens. (handy and great to have, but IQ/value for money are my priorities). I'd say get it!! If you can afford not to sell the 300/4 to be able to get this 80-200, then all the better.

    **From memory** this lens starts to work from about f/3.5 for razor sharpness, if you need that. I have tons of images if you need confirmation, I'm just massively disorganized when it comes to tagging images, so it takes me a while to find relevant images as examples.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    18 Nov 2007
    Location
    Sydney (Nth. Beaches)
    Posts
    1,190
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Kajo,

    I have a Nikon AF 80-200mm f2.8 lens and I consider it to be my best lens, I love it.
    Often the images you get with it are that sharp you could cut your fingers on them
    I often use it with a Kenko1.4X pro 300 teleconverter and get very pleasing results.

    The Auto Focus slows down a bit because it is driven from the cemera body, via the teleconverter. If your not shooting fast sport it is still very usable.

    One word of warning is that due to the construction of the lens it acts like a pump when focusing. This can draw dust into the lens in a dusty environment. I put a UV filter on my lens when shooting in damp or dusty areas. Check the lens very carefully for any dust inside it.

    I think that if the lens is in good or better condition $550 is a good price because they are as solid as a tank and it will serve you well for a long time. If I was selling mine I would ask for a lot more.
    Cheers
    Darey

    Nikon user, Thick skinned and wanting to improve, genuine C & C welcomed.

    Photographs don't lie ! - Anonymous Liar

  9. #9
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    26 Sep 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    202
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks a lot for all the comments so far. I do love the 300 f/4 (the latest model), it's just amazing how sharp it is. However I barely ever use it and if I do, I really miss zooming capability.

    Do the Nikon TC's (I have the 1.4 and 1.7 EII) both work with the 80-200 or do I lose AF capability?

    Btw. the exact model description is:
    Nikkor 80 - 200mm f/2.8 D(IF)
    Last edited by Kajo; 31-10-2010 at 10:08pm.

  10. #10
    A royal pain in the bum! arthurking83's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Jun 2006
    Location
    the worst house, in the best street
    Posts
    7,740
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks Darey!! I always forget that bit! ... yeah the front of the lens is not sealed and a UV/protective filter is almost a must on this lens. Once the filter is on, the rubberized ring around the front of the lens forms a good seal!..
    Hopefully the seller had the good sense to ignore common wisdom of not using UV/protective filters on lenses.
    They also don't come with lens hoods either, and Nikon's HB-7 can be considered expensive at about $40 too.

    Wayne already (pre)answered the question of II/II/E series TC compatibility.
    None of the series II or the series III TC's will work... or even mount(unless your handy with modifications). There is a small AF-S lens specific tab that inhibits mounting non AF-S lenses to these series II and III TC's. I think you need something like a TC14A(or maybe B)?? Nikon TC.. or even better!.. a Kenko Pro300DG series will work.

    **EDIT:** I just peeped and it looks like the only Nikon branded AF capable teleconverter for screw driven lenses is the TC16A!!

  11. #11
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    26 Sep 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    202
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    That's a shame, I may as well sell my two TC's then, since it's the only lens that can use them. Unless I get mechanical and try to fit the TC's on it...

  12. #12
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    26 Sep 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    202
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ok I just bought the lens today. Turns out that it actually is the AF-S version, so all my TCs are working. Yay, I'm happy!

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,837
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    There is no af-s version of the 80-200 on sale today, but the tcs should work well with the current af-d
    Darren
    Gear : Nikon Goodness
    Website : http://www.peakactionimages.com
    Please support Precious Hearts
    Constructive Critique of my images always appreciated

  14. #14
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    26 Sep 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    202
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yes for some reason they don't sell that one anymore but they still do sell the AF-D version...strange really.
    Anyways, I'm glad I got the AF-S model!

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,837
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    They stopped making them 4 years ago or so.....they are very hard to find even 2nd hand

  16. #16
    Member Ben's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Sep 2007
    Location
    Somewhere
    Posts
    32
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You did really well to get the AF-S version for $550, they usually go for a lot more...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •