DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. Whether it is Medium Format, fullframe, APS-C, MFT or smaller formats. Digital or film. DPRF is a forum for everybody and for every format.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

Which telezoom 8020028 or 7020028VR



I have purchased after a Nikon D70 now in the meantime a Nikon D80, Tokina 12-24, Nikon 50/1.8D, Nikon 85/1.8D and am looking now for a telezoom.

As far as I could research, the best options qualitywise would be either the current Nikon 80-200/2.8 or the new 70-200/2.8 VR.

Since there is a huge price difference (I could also buy the 80-200 on ebay used), I would be interested in your experience with those 2 lenses.

Is there a difference in image quality visible with a 10MP or 12 MP DSLR? Which one is better?

How about bokeh, lens flare, contrast, CA, Vignetting, light fall off etc.?

Thanks in advance
I have to add: I am not interested in the VR feature and I do not need absolutely F2.8.

So if someone knows a Zoom with aperture of 3.5-4.5 in the 70-200 range which is at least as good in image quality as the 2 zooms mentioned above I would be also interested in this.

Basically I am looking for a Nikon version of the Zeiss N 70-200/3.5-4.5
Hi Dirk, it does look like you like serious glass. Although I do not have any experience with the 80-200, I do own the 70-200 VR. And yes, it is every penny worth! Apart from the VR which is excellent (I've taken shots at 15th of a second...), do not forget about the AF-S! The lens is superfast and very accurate. I do take sport photos with the lens and it is just great. One thing to watch out for however is lens flare, but I've found that with the lens hood and just a bit of thinking before just jumping away and shoot, that is eliminated in 99.9% of the time.

My choice? The 70-200 AF-S VR!

Hope this helps! Hendrik
Hendrik Louw (Hendrik_louw) wrote on January 15:

' 2007 - 11:51 am,it does look like you like serious glass.'

Yes I do

What is disturbing me the most with both, the 70-200VR and the 80-200/2.8, is the weight. 1.4 and 1.2 KG is not that easy to handle with handhold shots. Of course the VR helps here obviously, but at this price tag, my wife is kind of concerned

What I liked with my old Zeiss N 70-200/3.5-4.5 was the combination of excellent image quality (no lens flare issues by the way) and low weight (around 600g). I used it with Fuji Velvia 50 and Provia 100F all the time.

With good high ISO performance nowadays, I feel that I do not need really 2.8 for my kind of shooting (no sports). For my personal needs in the telezoom range, wide open aperture like 2.8 only results in bigger size, weight and higher price

But if there is no other telezoom out there with 3.5-4.5 and similar image quality, I have probably to bite the bullet and buy one of those 2 mentioned.

This is why I am curious to hear experiences from other users. Anybody else who has experience with one of those or knows a good third alternative?
Hi Dirk, I have both lenses, bought 70-200 because of VR for indoor sports, use it wide open (2.8) almost all the time. Could make some comparison shots for you with D2Xs if you want. Regards, Jakob.
I have both lenses - I much prefer the 18-200 VR - I use it all the time, very rarely change lenses on my D200...quality is excellent, weight really isn't an issue - I like the heft and feel of a heavier camera -
Janez Skorjanc (Jakaskorjanc) wrote on January 15:

' 2007 - 12:49 pm,Could make some comparison shots for you with D2Xs if you want.'

Hi Janez,

this woud be very helpful. Upload size maximum is 800x800 and 130KB here, so a crop would bethe easiest way...

Nikon D2x, I would LOVE to have that one

Mike Pieklo (Peke) wrote on January 15:

' 2007 - 1:00 pm,I much prefer the 18-200 VR '

Hi Mike

Is this a typo? Did you mean 18-200 or 80-200?

I also read some revies about the brand new 70-300VR. only 750g. But I guess this will be inferior in image quality? Or are there any surprises out there?

Thanks to all in advance
Ok Dirk, I'll make it for the f stops from 2.8 till 8 stepwise for both lenses. I'll make corresponding crops, try to post it till Wednesday 17th of January. Regards.
No...no typo...it's the 18-200 VR - it's a fabulous lens...Nikon's description is 18-200mm f3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR DX Zoom...about $750US...

I was talking to a friend of mine the other day about this situation. He has the 2.8 and I mentioned that the new Nikon IR VR with ED glass are outstanding. I look at the VR as an easy 3 stops. To me three stops, reduced weight, and reduced initial cost sound like a winner to me.

I also purchased the new 24mm to 120mm IR VR ED for my wife and I think it is outstanding.