New Rumor of replacement to 80-400 AF VR Lens.

Started Mar 4, 2013 | Discussions thread
apaflo
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,854
Like?
Re: Don't think I'd spend $2K or more for ....
In reply to M Lammerse, Mar 5, 2013

M Lammerse wrote:

Shotcents wrote:

Jim F wrote:

... for a variable aperture zoom lens regardless. While we don't know what the real US price will be, likely it will be close to or more than $2K. I think I'd opt for a 70-200/2.8 with some TCs instead of paying $2K for a new, slow lens. I've already got enough old, slow lens as it is.

A 70-200 is not going to get to 400mm with reasonable IQ. If the 80-400 can and the newer VR keeps things under control then it will be useful for certain types of shooting.

Robert

Hi Robert,

Absolutely indeed.

I've not owned the old lens, but the major complain I understood of many users is it's slow focusing and not th image quality itself.That seems to be over with the newer version.

Michel

The 70-200mm f/2.8G VRII with the TC2EIII is as good as the current 80-400mm AF-D lense.  That certainly is "with reasonable IQ", though at 400mm neither of them competes with a Nikkor 400mm f/2.8 for sharpness.

And yes, the 80-400mm 4.5-5.6 AF-D can focus too slow.  The 70-200mm f/2.8G with a 2x TC (note that it works very well with the Kenko 2x 300 PRO DGX  TC as well as with the Nikon 2x TC) focuses faster than the older 80-400mm.

Hence, if the new G version has better VR and fast AF-S, being at all useful with a Nikkor 1.4x TC would be an extra.  Nobody would buy it just to use with the TC, but many who would jump at a faster focusing 80-400mm will also use a TC with it if that produces moderately acceptable results.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow