Nikon Lenses

[arthurking83]

I'd say that the 80-200/2.8 is more of a good lens, rather than great lens.
For sheer IQ the Tammy beats it hands down(except that the Nikon has better colour and bokeh)
Nikon is 'sturdier build quality, with it's all metal body, but unless you want to use it as a hammer this isn't really all that important.
Of the two focusing types, the Tammy is the least inconvenient of the two, and for all intents and purposes, both are not ideal by modern standards.
80-200 doesn't come with a lens hood, and having seen the optional hood that Nikon has for it, it's also sub par when compared to a more modern lens hood.
Don't' get me wrong tho, the 80-200 is still a good lens, it's just that it's now not really that good when compared to the opposition.
Biggest deal breaker for me, is the non sealed design of the lens. It needs a filter of some kind on the front to stop the ingress of dust into the lens over the long term.

(actually, Bjorn and others reckon that for Fx and super sharp corner IQ, the 80-200AF-S is better than a 70-200VR(I)! .. maybe that's why? )

Of the cheaper three lenses in this segment(Sigma, Tammy and Nikon 80-200mm) .. I reckon the best order in terms of ability are: Sigma for the HSM(and probably the OS), the Tammy for the more contrasty and sharper IQ wide open .. but you could easily switch those two based on usage and requirements .. and then the Nikon 80-200.

[darrenmars]

I personally wasn't happy with the tammy 70-200 I had (this was a while back now tho). Wasn't sharp until stopped down to between f/5.6 and f/11, which defeated the point of getting something with the ability to open up to f/2.8. I probably had a bad copy as I have seen what the tamron tele-zooms in that range are capable of. The other thing that got under my skin was the zoom ring (or was it the focus ring?) worked the opposite way that the Nikon ones do. Drove me nuts.

I like my 80-200 AF

[kiwi]

Sigma just won european lens of the year....best bang for bucks out there I think

[arthurking83]

I personally wasn't happy with the tammy 70-200 I had (this was a while back now tho). Wasn't sharp until stopped down to between f/5.6 and f/11, which defeated the point of getting something with the ability to open up to f/2.8. I probably had a bad copy as I have seen what the tamron tele-zooms in that range are capable of. The other thing that got under my skin was the zoom ring (or was it the focus ring?) worked the opposite way that the Nikon ones do. Drove me nuts.

I like my 80-200 AF

Yeah! weird.. my experience is exactly the other way round.
That's why I sold my 80-200 and got the Tammy 70-200 instead!

[knumbnutz]

Sigma just won european lens of the year....best bang for bucks out there I think

If you are selective about the choice of which sigma lens, then they have some stunning lenses.
Conversely, some not so good stuff.

[fillum]

Just a reminder that the Nikkor 80-200 AF will not auto focus on the OP's D60.


Cheers.

[darrenmars]

Just a reminder that the Nikkor 80-200 AF will not auto focus on the OP's D60.


Cheers.

Yep. I realised this when I got to work this morning and came to say exactly that!

[RRRoger]

Here is what I recommend:
1. D7000 beats anything Canon now has (especially for the price).
Of course all manufactures will come out with something better eventually.
2. Used 17-35, 28-70, and AF-S 80-200 or first generation 70-200.
3. New Nikkor 28-300