Nikon Telephoto Zoom Lenses

Adrian Wong · 24th Feb 2005, 06:26 PM

Hello everyone!

Just wanted to initiate a discussion on Nikon's range of telephoto zoom lenses.

I think the focus of many users is mainly on the 70-210mm and 80-200mm lenses.

When it comes to the 70-210mm, Ken Rockwell's review of the Nikkor AF-D 70-210mm f/4.5-5.6 was so good that it has become a really overpriced lens. Is this lens really that much better than the older non-D AF 70-210mm f/4.5-5.6?

A better but more expensive alternative might be to go for the 80-200mm f/2.8 lenses. But here, there are quite a few versions.

1. AF 80-200mm f/2.8 - push-pull zoom, slow auto-focus, no lens collar.

2. AF-D 80-200mm f/2.8 - push-pull zoom, slow auto-focus, no lens collar, with distance information.

3. AF-D 80-200mm f/2.8 - ring zoom, fast auto-focus, with lens collar and distance information.

4. AF-S 80-200mm f/2.8 - ring zoom, faster and quieter auto-focus, with lens collar and distance information.

Now, the AF-S 80-200mm f/2.8 is supposedly replaced by the AF-S 70-200mm VR ED-IF.

The thing is has anyone tried the non-D 80-200mm lens or even the first generation AF-D 80-200mm lens? I wonder how much slower is the auto-focus, compared to the second generation AF-D 80-200mm as well as the AF-S 80-200mm.

Optically though, I've read that all the 80-200mm lens perform about the same.

Oh well, do give me your thoughts about Nikon's telephoto zoom lenses if you will. Thanks!

Chai · 24th Feb 2005, 08:02 PM

I doubt anyone here is rich enough to have tested 2 of those lenses, these are freaking expensive lens! Unless you are a pro photogs...

Adrian Wong · 24th Feb 2005, 10:18 PM

Well, we can still discuss those lenses or any other good Nikon telephoto lenses.

Personally, I have no idea how third-party lenses from the likes of Sigma, Tamron, etc. perform compared to the Nikkor telephoto lenses. If anyone here can give us an idea of their performance, that would be great.

peaz · 24th Feb 2005, 11:10 PM

Depends what your requirements are i guess.

Optically, Sigma's and Tamron's lenses aren't bad at all. In fact, some of the more popular lenses are Sigma's and not Nikon's. HOwever, when it comes to focusing speeds, Nikkor's are still much faster thanks to the Silent Wave Motor...

If focusing speed is not a concern, then i dun think it's a concern at all. Also, in sports photography, the more important feature is actually the continous-AF feature. If the camera C-AF is good, then a slower AF lens would peform well too as the camera is able to track the subject well... that's where D2x and 1DMarkII comes in and perform.. not even the 20D or D70...

Chai · 24th Feb 2005, 11:45 PM

The tools can only help you this much. The person behind the camera still determines the outcome of the shot. I still managed to capture pretty decent shots without needing AF when I was at Sepang! I don't think I will ever need AF-C. But it's a good luxury to have, but not compulsary.

TBH, Nikon has pretty limited telephoto zoom lineup. The only good ones I can think of is 80-400VR which is a freaking slow lens, or 70-200VR. The rest are pretty much cheap lens. 80-200 are pretty good, but they are not cheap either, especially the AF-S version, and they are running out of stock. In comparison with Canon, even the 70-200L has 3 different versions! From cheap to expensive lens.

But sadly, Nikon only offers expensive ones new, or really cheap toy lens like 70-300G.

peaz · 25th Feb 2005, 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chai

The tools can only help you this much. The person behind the camera still determines the outcome of the shot. I still managed to capture pretty decent shots without needing AF when I was at Sepang! I don't think I will ever need AF-C. But it's a good luxury to have, but not compulsary.

LOL. Of course. Photographers have been taking great photographs using technology as old as half a century... but till today, some of those shots are simply just classic.

Adrian Wong · 25th Feb 2005, 12:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peaz

Depends what your requirements are i guess.

Optically, Sigma's and Tamron's lenses aren't bad at all. In fact, some of the more popular lenses are Sigma's and not Nikon's. HOwever, when it comes to focusing speeds, Nikkor's are still much faster thanks to the Silent Wave Motor...

If focusing speed is not a concern, then i dun think it's a concern at all. Also, in sports photography, the more important feature is actually the continous-AF feature. If the camera C-AF is good, then a slower AF lens would peform well too as the camera is able to track the subject well... that's where D2x and 1DMarkII comes in and perform.. not even the 20D or D70...

Hmm.. I thought Sigma has that USM (Ultrasonic Motor)/S (Silent Wave)-technology too? In the form of HSM (Hyper Sonic Motor)?

BTW, the main advantages of USM or Silent Wave are the ability to immediately manually focus the lens as well as quieter focusing. It may be faster at focusing but I don't think that's the main criteria for this technology.

Adrian Wong · 25th Feb 2005, 12:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chai

The tools can only help you this much. The person behind the camera still determines the outcome of the shot. I still managed to capture pretty decent shots without needing AF when I was at Sepang! I don't think I will ever need AF-C. But it's a good luxury to have, but not compulsary.

TBH, Nikon has pretty limited telephoto zoom lineup. The only good ones I can think of is 80-400VR which is a freaking slow lens, or 70-200VR. The rest are pretty much cheap lens. 80-200 are pretty good, but they are not cheap either, especially the AF-S version, and they are running out of stock. In comparison with Canon, even the 70-200L has 3 different versions! From cheap to expensive lens.

But sadly, Nikon only offers expensive ones new, or really cheap toy lens like 70-300G.

ROTFL! Needless to say. Like I always say, it's the photographer that counts.

That's why I don't mind playing with even cheap lens. In fact, I'm considering alternatives like Sigma or Tamron.

I think what matters is playing with your equipment so that you know them inside out. This will ensure you won't miss a great photo opportunity when it presents itself.

peaz · 25th Feb 2005, 12:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adrian Wong

Hmm.. I thought Sigma has that USM (Ultrasonic Motor)/S (Silent Wave)-technology too? In the form of HSM (Hyper Sonic Motor)?

BTW, the main advantages of USM or Silent Wave are the ability to immediately manually focus the lens as well as quieter focusing. It may be faster at focusing but I don't think that's the main criteria for this technology.

Yup that's right. But i think they are still not as fast as Nikkors or Canons.. but then again, they are not that slow either...

ZuePhok · 25th Feb 2005, 03:07 AM

what happens if you place a magnifier lens in front of ur cam?

24th Feb 2005, 06:26 PM	#1 (permalink)
Adrian Wong Da Boss Join Date: 10 Oct 2002 Location: In front of my ASUS F8V notebook! Posts: 33,143 Reputation: 3730 Rep Power: 78	Nikon Telephoto Zoom Lenses Hello everyone! Just wanted to initiate a discussion on Nikon's range of telephoto zoom lenses. I think the focus of many users is mainly on the 70-210mm and 80-200mm lenses. When it comes to the 70-210mm, Ken Rockwell's review of the Nikkor AF-D 70-210mm f/4.5-5.6 was so good that it has become a really overpriced lens. Is this lens really that much better than the older non-D AF 70-210mm f/4.5-5.6? A better but more expensive alternative might be to go for the 80-200mm f/2.8 lenses. But here, there are quite a few versions. 1. AF 80-200mm f/2.8 - push-pull zoom, slow auto-focus, no lens collar. 2. AF-D 80-200mm f/2.8 - push-pull zoom, slow auto-focus, no lens collar, with distance information. 3. AF-D 80-200mm f/2.8 - ring zoom, fast auto-focus, with lens collar and distance information. 4. AF-S 80-200mm f/2.8 - ring zoom, faster and quieter auto-focus, with lens collar and distance information. Now, the AF-S 80-200mm f/2.8 is supposedly replaced by the AF-S 70-200mm VR ED-IF. The thing is has anyone tried the non-D 80-200mm lens or even the first generation AF-D 80-200mm lens? I wonder how much slower is the auto-focus, compared to the second generation AF-D 80-200mm as well as the AF-S 80-200mm. Optically though, I've read that all the 80-200mm lens perform about the same. Oh well, do give me your thoughts about Nikon's telephoto zoom lenses if you will. Thanks! __________________ Dr. Adrian Wong Tech ARP \| Blog @ Tech ARP \| The Free Trade Zone DYKT : The only offshore account I have is at the sand bank? We need PROGRAMMERS and TECHNICAL WRITERS! Contact us if you are a hot shot programmer or technical writer! My items for sale : 50x SD Card \| Memory Stick PRO \| Cyclone Energy Saver \| Seiko SS watch \| Tiger/Carlsberg beer jugs \| Travel Speakers \| Motorola V600 \| Nokia N90 SOLD! \| New Lowepro Mini Trekker AW Other items for sale @ the FTZ : Zalman CNPS9500 LED @ $20 \| Zalman CNPS7700 Cu @ $20 \| Zalman CNPS7000 Cu @ $20 \| Swarovski bracelet watches \| Dell 17" LCD \| Hi-Fi speakers \| English DIVX movies \| HP LaserJet toners! \| Office chairs

24th Feb 2005, 08:02 PM	#2 (permalink)
Chai Administrator Join Date: 6 Oct 2002 Location: Maranello Posts: 28,127 Reputation: 4649 Rep Power: 82	I doubt anyone here is rich enough to have tested 2 of those lenses, these are freaking expensive lens! Unless you are a pro photogs... __________________ Chai (Contributor & Forum Admin) http://www.techarp.com/

24th Feb 2005, 10:18 PM	#3 (permalink)
Adrian Wong Da Boss Join Date: 10 Oct 2002 Location: In front of my ASUS F8V notebook! Posts: 33,143 Reputation: 3730 Rep Power: 78	Well, we can still discuss those lenses or any other good Nikon telephoto lenses. Personally, I have no idea how third-party lenses from the likes of Sigma, Tamron, etc. perform compared to the Nikkor telephoto lenses. If anyone here can give us an idea of their performance, that would be great. __________________ Dr. Adrian Wong Tech ARP \| Blog @ Tech ARP \| The Free Trade Zone DYKT : The only offshore account I have is at the sand bank? We need PROGRAMMERS and TECHNICAL WRITERS! Contact us if you are a hot shot programmer or technical writer! My items for sale : 50x SD Card \| Memory Stick PRO \| Cyclone Energy Saver \| Seiko SS watch \| Tiger/Carlsberg beer jugs \| Travel Speakers \| Motorola V600 \| Nokia N90 SOLD! \| New Lowepro Mini Trekker AW Other items for sale @ the FTZ : Zalman CNPS9500 LED @ $20 \| Zalman CNPS7700 Cu @ $20 \| Zalman CNPS7000 Cu @ $20 \| Swarovski bracelet watches \| Dell 17" LCD \| Hi-Fi speakers \| English DIVX movies \| HP LaserJet toners! \| Office chairs

24th Feb 2005, 11:10 PM	#4 (permalink)
peaz ARP Webmaster Join Date: 13 Oct 2002 Location: http://atpeaz.com/ Posts: 8,595 Reputation: 1673 Rep Power: 32	Depends what your requirements are i guess. Optically, Sigma's and Tamron's lenses aren't bad at all. In fact, some of the more popular lenses are Sigma's and not Nikon's. HOwever, when it comes to focusing speeds, Nikkor's are still much faster thanks to the Silent Wave Motor... If focusing speed is not a concern, then i dun think it's a concern at all. Also, in sports photography, the more important feature is actually the continous-AF feature. If the camera C-AF is good, then a slower AF lens would peform well too as the camera is able to track the subject well... that's where D2x and 1DMarkII comes in and perform.. not even the 20D or D70... __________________ Ken Ng Tech ARP Follow me at Twitter Blogs @ http://www.atpeaz.com/

24th Feb 2005, 11:45 PM	#5 (permalink)
Chai Administrator Join Date: 6 Oct 2002 Location: Maranello Posts: 28,127 Reputation: 4649 Rep Power: 82	The tools can only help you this much. The person behind the camera still determines the outcome of the shot. I still managed to capture pretty decent shots without needing AF when I was at Sepang! I don't think I will ever need AF-C. But it's a good luxury to have, but not compulsary. TBH, Nikon has pretty limited telephoto zoom lineup. The only good ones I can think of is 80-400VR which is a freaking slow lens, or 70-200VR. The rest are pretty much cheap lens. 80-200 are pretty good, but they are not cheap either, especially the AF-S version, and they are running out of stock. In comparison with Canon, even the 70-200L has 3 different versions! From cheap to expensive lens. But sadly, Nikon only offers expensive ones new, or really cheap toy lens like 70-300G. __________________ Chai (Contributor & Forum Admin) http://www.techarp.com/

25th Feb 2005, 03:07 AM	#10 (permalink)
ZuePhok Hold me back! I can't stop posting!!! Join Date: 16 Dec 2002 Location: Floating Island Of Mandango Posts: 8,810 Reputation: 3294 Rep Power: 48	what happens if you place a magnifier lens in front of ur cam? __________________ my motto: poison first, think later. Last edited by ZuePhok : 25th Feb 2005 at 03:15 AM.