Nikon lens for D70

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Jan Opach, Aug 30, 2004.

  1. Jan Opach

    Jan Opach Guest

    Hi,

    I'm planning to buy a telephoto lens for my Nikon D70.
    The two that I looked at are: Nikon AF Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED and Nikon
    AF-S VR Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D ED-IF.
    I have read a few reviews on both of them, and they both are described as
    excellent lenses. Although the first one is a bit slower, it is almost half
    the price of the second one.

    I would like you to hear your opinion, from you experience, on two things.
    First, is it justyfiable to pay that extra money for the S VR lens, do you
    really get so much more and much better quality with the more expensive
    lens? Second, the Nikon AF Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED is an older lens - have
    you heard any news on it being discountinued in the near future, do you know
    if there is going to be a new lens that would replace it? (btw, I have
    contacted Nikon with regards to my second questions, but they did not
    mention about any future plans for a new replacement).

    I would appreciate you advise.

    Jan
     
    Jan Opach, Aug 30, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. I've only used the old style 80-200/2.8 lens with no tripod mount, and loved
    it. I'd buy the full AF-S lens in a heartbeat - with tripod mount!

    Here's a handheld sample from the push-pull zoom, hand held:

    http://www.surfworx.com.au/AFLweb/pages/B - Screamer.htm

    Derrick


    "Jan Opach" <> wrote in message
    news:W6yYc.255200$M95.228191@pd7tw1no...
    > Hi,
    >
    > I'm planning to buy a telephoto lens for my Nikon D70.
    > The two that I looked at are: Nikon AF Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED and Nikon
    > AF-S VR Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D ED-IF.
    > I have read a few reviews on both of them, and they both are described as
    > excellent lenses. Although the first one is a bit slower, it is almost

    half
    > the price of the second one.
    >
    > I would like you to hear your opinion, from you experience, on two things.
    > First, is it justyfiable to pay that extra money for the S VR lens, do you
    > really get so much more and much better quality with the more expensive
    > lens? Second, the Nikon AF Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED is an older lens -

    have
    > you heard any news on it being discountinued in the near future, do you

    know
    > if there is going to be a new lens that would replace it? (btw, I have
    > contacted Nikon with regards to my second questions, but they did not
    > mention about any future plans for a new replacement).
    >
    > I would appreciate you advise.
    >
    > Jan
    >
    >
     
    Surfworx Photography, Aug 30, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Jan Opach

    [BnH] Guest

    What area of photography are you in ?
    If sport and other fast moving actions ... S motor is a charm.
    If slow action like modelling, and some birdwatching [ well .. you can't get
    far with 200 tele end anyway ] , 80-200 is quite alright.
    Even for car racing .. you can still use 80-200 [ I use CAM1300 camera btw
    ;)]
    I also do some basketball shot using the 80-200 and with ISO pushed to 1600
    to get 1/500" speed.

    =bob=

    "Jan Opach" <> wrote in message
    news:W6yYc.255200$M95.228191@pd7tw1no...
    > Hi,
    >
    > I'm planning to buy a telephoto lens for my Nikon D70.
    > The two that I looked at are: Nikon AF Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED and Nikon
    > AF-S VR Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D ED-IF.
    > I have read a few reviews on both of them, and they both are described as
    > excellent lenses. Although the first one is a bit slower, it is almost

    half
    > the price of the second one.
    >
    > I would like you to hear your opinion, from you experience, on two things.
    > First, is it justyfiable to pay that extra money for the S VR lens, do you
    > really get so much more and much better quality with the more expensive
    > lens? Second, the Nikon AF Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED is an older lens -

    have
    > you heard any news on it being discountinued in the near future, do you

    know
    > if there is going to be a new lens that would replace it? (btw, I have
    > contacted Nikon with regards to my second questions, but they did not
    > mention about any future plans for a new replacement).
    >
    > I would appreciate you advise.
    >
    > Jan
    >
    >
     
    [BnH], Aug 30, 2004
    #3
  4. Jan Opach

    Aaron Ng Guest

    Image quality-wise, both are superb. You will only be able to tell the
    difference between the 2 lenses when you start printing at 8"x10" or larger.
    On the other hand, The S (silentwave motor) feature is very welcomed,
    because it takes a load off your D70's motor and is much quieter and faster
    than the 80-200mm f/2.8D's focusing. Do you need it? If you are shooting
    sports and the like, the extra speed might help. VR on the other hand is
    very useful. Shooting 200mm (equivalent 300mm on D70) handheld at 1/60-1/125
    shutter speed is great!

    If I had the cash, I would go for the 70-200mm AFS VR G. But even if I was
    forced to get the 80-200mm instead, it would not lose out on image quality,
    only convenience.

    Regards,
    Aaron
     
    Aaron Ng, Aug 30, 2004
    #4
  5. Hi Jan,
    I've had both, and traded in the old one on the VR version.

    There were two points:
    1. The SWM - seemed to hunt less on my D100, and the speed of focus was
    better for sports and nature photography. Even shooting my two year old
    playing in the backyard is easier with the lightning quick focus.
    2. The VR - shooting watersking and wakeboarding from a tow boat is far
    easier with the VR. Also shooting company events in a conference hall
    with the VR means you can shoot at 1/30th or even lower if properly
    supported. I've had low light shots come out at 1/15th and sometimes
    lower.

    My suggestion is to save your pennies (or your $20's) for a while and
    get the VR version. I've always tried to buy top of the line and keep
    it as long as I can.

    By the way, Nikon makes a great 1.7 teleconverter that is rasor sharp on
    the VR...just to tempt you into spending more money.

    Nikon is known for being tight lipped about their new products. I've
    heard stories that Nikon staff fear for their jobs if they talk about
    new products. You're probably wasting your time trying to get "what's
    coming" info from them.


    Colin Gladwish
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada




    "Jan Opach" <> wrote in
    news:W6yYc.255200$M95.228191@pd7tw1no:

    > Hi,
    >
    > I'm planning to buy a telephoto lens for my Nikon D70.
    > The two that I looked at are: Nikon AF Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED and
    > Nikon AF-S VR Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D ED-IF.
    > I have read a few reviews on both of them, and they both are described
    > as excellent lenses. Although the first one is a bit slower, it is
    > almost half the price of the second one.
    >
    > I would like you to hear your opinion, from you experience, on two
    > things. First, is it justyfiable to pay that extra money for the S VR
    > lens, do you really get so much more and much better quality with the
    > more expensive lens? Second, the Nikon AF Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED is
    > an older lens - have you heard any news on it being discountinued in
    > the near future, do you know if there is going to be a new lens that
    > would replace it? (btw, I have contacted Nikon with regards to my
    > second questions, but they did not mention about any future plans for
    > a new replacement).
    >
    > I would appreciate you advise.
    >
    > Jan
    >
    >
     
    Colin Gladwish, Aug 30, 2004
    #5
  6. Jan Opach

    Dwight Guest

    I agree with Colin. I have the 70-200mm f2.8 VR AFS ED-IF G, etc., etc.
    It is quite excellent. I also have the 80-400mm VR f4.5-5.6 (I think)
    and it, too is superb! I shoot quite a lot of low light live
    performance stuff and have crystal clear shots at 400mm and 1/10 sec
    handheld ... not all of them mind you, but maybe 1 in 25 and that's all
    I need. The VR lenses aren't magic and you need to give them a second
    with the shutter half depressed to 'warm up', but once you are used to
    it, the VR is worth it's weight in gold. I also agree with Colin that
    the 'S' (silent wave motor feature) is well worth the expense.

    My digital body is a Fuji S2 Pro so I can't really speak to the D70.

    Dwight

    Colin Gladwish wrote:
    > Hi Jan,
    > I've had both, and traded in the old one on the VR version.
    >
    > There were two points:
    > 1. The SWM - seemed to hunt less on my D100, and the speed of focus was
    > better for sports and nature photography. Even shooting my two year old
    > playing in the backyard is easier with the lightning quick focus.
    > 2. The VR - shooting watersking and wakeboarding from a tow boat is far
    > easier with the VR. Also shooting company events in a conference hall
    > with the VR means you can shoot at 1/30th or even lower if properly
    > supported. I've had low light shots come out at 1/15th and sometimes
    > lower.
    >
    > My suggestion is to save your pennies (or your $20's) for a while and
    > get the VR version. I've always tried to buy top of the line and keep
    > it as long as I can.
    >
    > By the way, Nikon makes a great 1.7 teleconverter that is rasor sharp on
    > the VR...just to tempt you into spending more money.
    >
    > Nikon is known for being tight lipped about their new products. I've
    > heard stories that Nikon staff fear for their jobs if they talk about
    > new products. You're probably wasting your time trying to get "what's
    > coming" info from them.
    >
    >
    > Colin Gladwish
    > Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > "Jan Opach" <> wrote in
    > news:W6yYc.255200$M95.228191@pd7tw1no:
    >
    >
    >>Hi,
    >>
    >>I'm planning to buy a telephoto lens for my Nikon D70.
    >>The two that I looked at are: Nikon AF Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED and
    >>Nikon AF-S VR Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D ED-IF.
    >>I have read a few reviews on both of them, and they both are described
    >>as excellent lenses. Although the first one is a bit slower, it is
    >>almost half the price of the second one.
    >>
    >>I would like you to hear your opinion, from you experience, on two
    >>things. First, is it justyfiable to pay that extra money for the S VR
    >>lens, do you really get so much more and much better quality with the
    >>more expensive lens? Second, the Nikon AF Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED is
    >>an older lens - have you heard any news on it being discountinued in
    >>the near future, do you know if there is going to be a new lens that
    >>would replace it? (btw, I have contacted Nikon with regards to my
    >>second questions, but they did not mention about any future plans for
    >>a new replacement).
    >>
    >>I would appreciate you advise.
    >>
    >>Jan
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
     
    Dwight, Aug 31, 2004
    #6
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Zhen Jie

    nikkor D lens with nikon d70?

    Zhen Jie, Feb 27, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    395
  2. bob

    Lens adapter to put Canon lens on Nikon D70 ?

    bob, Aug 18, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    14,457
    Darrell Larose
    Aug 24, 2004
  3. Xtx99
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    616
    Dave L
    Jan 13, 2005
  4. Replies:
    10
    Views:
    1,014
    Joseph Miller
    Jun 7, 2005
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,500
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page