B&H has this lens for about $1800. This is $1000 more than the non-S version. Has anyone had the chance to evaluate this new lens? How much does it weigh? Is the AF noticably faster? Can I assume the optics are equivalent?

-- Chris Hawkins (peace@clover.net), January 18, 1999

Answers

I guess the trusty (and killer) 80-200/2.8D (one touch) still looks AWESOME for $500-600 used since in my opinion the differences that it has versus the other two Nikon 80-200/2.8D are miniscule. The only bad thing about it is that it is a little slow to focus, especially in older bodies (N6006,N8008,F4). I personally feel lucky. ;-)

Start of rant:

$1800? Is Nikon nuts? With $1800 you can buy the Canon 70-200L with the two teleconverters (grey market - Canon honors the warranty though). You can buy the older Nikon version and add the 300/4 and still have around $300. With around $2000 you can buy a small SLR system containing a 80-200/2.8 lens (e.g. EOS5/Elan/N70/N90+80- 200+50+24). I understand that this is a new and "hot" item, but I was not aware that Nikon thought it can price equipment like Leica. I am a Nikon user and I bought Nikon because they had more reasonable prices for their quality glass than Canon. I can't believe the upgraded version is worth the extra $1000, unless the zoom is now as good as the Nikon 180/2.8 or the Canon 135/2 (doubtful). USM/SWM is not really that important for most lenses, especially with the new cameras that can focus very fast (N70 and up) and with those that have separate autofocus start buttons (F100, F5). It will make or lose the shot in a relatively very small number of cases. The SWM should be an upgrade that most of all offers extra convenience to the user in order to make the optics more attractive. Nikon is 5 years late and expect to be paid as if they just discovered the technology? This must be a joke if not a stupid marketing decision. The price should have been about $100 more than the Canon 70-200L not, $500.

End of rant

-- Costas Dimitropoulos (costas@udel.edu), January 18, 1999.

Chris, let me explain to you how good the oldest Nikon 80-200/2.8 (one-touch, no tripod collar) is:

A friend has a 16x20 enlargement of a Royal Gold 100 shot of a head and shoulders portrait of a family member which he shot casually at 200/2.8 on a monopod before getting into his car to go to a ballgame. It looks as if it has been shot with a medium format camera. No grain, excellent color tones, nice smooth blur of out-of-focus highlights. Of course, the shot also excels due to the beautiful expression of the subject and that's why this was enlarged so much and we have the opportunity to drool over the print.

Do not waste your extra $1000. Get the tripod collar version of the lens. I am still shocked about the $1800 figure. I was expecting around $1500 (max).

-- Costas Dimitropoulos (costas@udel.edu), January 18, 1999.

Yes, the old 80-200 is excellent in terms of optics, but I am afraid that we are forced to buy the new and expensive one some days later as Nikon may discontinue the old zoom.

-- Eric Ung (ung@chevalier.net), January 19, 1999.

I agree that that the S version is not worth the (outrageously) extra money. Having used the collar version for almost a year, I had the opportunity to compare the two. If the AF on the S version is any faster it is not noticable. The only discernable difference is the SWM's slient operation. Before you spend the extra cash, take your favorite body to the shop, do a comparison, and maybe even take home a 300/4 as so correctly is stated above.

-- Jeff Thomsen (jesper@mozart.inet.co.th), January 19, 1999.

I had a posting (deleted) in photo.net around photokina (Oct'98) where I saw the new 80-200 AF-S. A own the two-touch 80-200.

I also did not notice a substantial difference in AF-speed, however the AF-S is very silent. It is slightly bigger and I heard also of a price like 3500DM which is around 2000US$.

It is probably surpricing but the optics are NOT the same, so I am really wondering whether they have been able to do even better than with the old ones. Another difference are the teleconverters, the AF-S works perfectly with the 14E and 20E. However, I don't know about the optical performance of these combinations. It would be very interesting to hear more about that, especially since the old 80-200 did not work well with a 2X converter and of the 1.4X the 14B was preferable to the 14E (modified).

At photokina I was also shocked about the prices. Of course I was not even thinking about an upgrade to this lens. But I was really interested in the coming 28-70/2.8 AF-S, until I heard that the price will be the same roughly 2000US$, which is much more than the comparable Canon lens.

-- siegfried boes (boes@first.gmd.de), January 19, 1999.

I think that the 3 versions of the Nikkor AF 80-200/2.8 have different optical formulas. However, I strongly believe that the differences that one will observe in optical quality are not large.

As far as the teleconverters are concerned, I believe that you can use third party teleconverters which retain AF and are D-type (I read somewhere that the new Sigma APO extenders are pretty good and not very expensive; I don't know how they match, but since they work well with the Sigma 70-200 they should work ok with the Nikon). Not to mention that the Sigma AF 70-200/2.8D APO HSM is very good lens in its own right and costs around $750 new. Anyway, if you add another $800 (Nikon teleconverters) to the extra $1000 of the AF-S version we have an amount which I personally feel that it can be spent in a variety of ways which are better than buying the AF-S+TC combo (e.g. put it aside and save up for a 300/2.8). Nevertheless, that does not mean that the AF-S+TC combo will not be extremely enjoyable and rewarding when in use. I do not think that this is an issue of having or wanting to spend the the money. For me it is an issue of resisting a certain marketing strategy which I can not understand or accept.

-- Costas Dimitropoulos (costas@udel.edu), January 19, 1999.

this is not a canon vs nikon troll, i promise, it's meant to be a serious question about lenses and maybe economics.

for many years we've heard "nikon has cheaper "quality glass" so i chose them over canon. what is canon thinking charging $1500 for a 70-200 2.8 and 28-70 2.8. nikon's are only $1000, that fancy motor can't cost $500" and i believed that. the motor can't be worth that much.

but now nikon releases it's own USM/HSM/-S lenses and raises the prices $1000. so for comparable lenses now canon is cheaper! wait until the nikon 20-35 -S version comes out, it's going to cost $2500 for pete's sake! i wonder how many people will leave nikon for canon to get cheaper lenses?

are those darn motors really that expensive? $500 for canon, $1000 for nikon? or is this just an economics thing? they are charging that much because people are paying that much?

-- Sean Hester (seanh@ncfweb.net), January 19, 1999.

Sean you have answered your own question. They are charging too much because we are paying too much. In this perspective, I think that Leica is not that expensive because they have awesome build quality, their lenses are almost uniformly excellent at large apertures and more importantly they are manual which means that they do have in general a larger lifetime and thus a larger resale value. However, you can not justify certain prices for certain services, period. Anyway, the AF-S and the Canon USM version are not equivalent by themselves alone, it depends on the use and the body they are mounted on. That's where they base the logic of charging $1000 for a lens which is not that different in everyday performance.

I have chosen Nikon over Canon because they have cheaper equipment and because in general their consumer lenses are better than Canon's. I believe that it was a good decision, since there are also some great MF gear that I can use. It is obvious that technique is much more important than equipment, as is knowing to set up a shot from a compositional point of view. It is also obvious that top-notch lenses have small differences from brand to brand. Will Nikon now have more expensive equipment in general? Probably not, but I don't care. However, I do care about good optics and I will be very cautious in my future purchases because I still have a relatively small system that I can sell for a good price. I was thinking of purchasing a new body and a 300/4, but the price of the 80-200 AF-S and the fact that they still have not made newer TCs that AF with their older non AF-S or AF-I lenses is making me hesitate. They obviously want to make people buy the more expensive gear. I can understand this. They want to make money after all. However, the older one-touch AF 80-200/2.8D is not that slow on the bodies from N70 and up, even though it is definitely slower than the newer lenses. It costs around $500 used and so does the newer two-touch version. Nobody will regret buying these lenses. In fact, I wish the AF-S were cheaper so that I could find more good deals on used Nikon AF stuff, since a lot more people would have switched to AF-S. By the way, how stupid can people be to "upgrade" the Nikon AF 20-35 for the AF-S. Due to the depth of field that wide angles have, AF is extremely fast to begin with. If they switch systems or upgrade, then they deserve having to pay such high prices. The best strategy is to show restraint in order to make the prices drop to reasonable levels. Otherwise, one will end up paying a lot of money for very little gain. Anyway, it is still a free world.

For me, the subject is closed. It is very simple: Buy AF-S? Not yet.

-- Costas Dimitropoulos (costas@udel.edu), January 19, 1999.

Relax. The 80-200 AF S lens has only been on the market for a few days. The price will drop.

Canon users have shown us that fast focusing speed and quiet operation are not the only, or even the main reasons, to want USM or Silent Wave techology. It is the ability to manually focus without having to move one or more switches on the body or lens that has proven to be so valuable in real world situations.

-- Bob (rljones@avana.net), January 19, 1999.

Several dealers are quoting much lower prices for US lenses; however, since the lens is not widely available here yet, any fuming over the price is a little premature.

The main reason for getting this lens is its compatibility with TC-14E and TC-20E teleconverters. An early report from a user I trust indicates that there has been enough improvement in optical performance to make its use with either TC quite practical.

-- Danny Weber (danny_weber@compuserve.com), January 19, 1999.

Recall that when the F5 was first introduced, it was US$2799 at B&H? Now it is down to $1900 with USA warranty. Of course, the Yen exchange rate plays a role in the price drop, but the initial demand has also been a major factor.

Let those who want to be the first among their friends to pay primium prices for the 80-200 AF-S. I would wait a few months to give Nikon a chance to correct any bugs and let the price to drop.

-- Shun Cheung (shun@worldnet.att.net), January 19, 1999.

Like Siegfried I also saw the new 80-200/2.8 AFS at the Photokina Koln. This enormous lens (with an huge hood) will not go to be unnoticed by many persons. I want to reduce the weight of my photo bag all the time so I think the normal version of the 80-200/2.8 is really the limit. Naturally, AF was very fast but really not that much faster than the latest 2-touch version. Yes, it was silent also and you could use the TC 14E and 20E on it. But still, I don't think that people who own the previous versions of this optic, will take better pictures with this overpriced beast. Use the money on something more useful.

-- Ivan Verschoote (ivan.verschoote@rug.ac.be), January 20, 1999.

It is time to go back to your college or high school marekting course (you did take one, didn't you?) and review who buys the first production of any new product. There is a group of people out in the world who HAVE TO HAVE the first of any new product on the market. They are willing to pay whatever the price is to have the product. This is true of cars, audio eqipment, computers and camera equipment. Once this group is done buying the new stuff at a HIGH price, the manufacturers and retailers will have no choice but to lower the price so that the rest of us can also buy the product. This is actually very good! Why? Because these folks who have to be the first in their town to own the newest things will pay most of the research and development costs of the new products. We will not have to absorb as much of this cost.

So how does this affect the new 80-200 AF-S lens? Quite simply, Nikon folks have been demanding such a lens for quite some time. Nikon has met this demand, a good thing. I suspect that it will take about a year for all of the folks who have to have this new lens first to work their way through the early production. Let them do so. In a year or so we should see the price drop as the demand falls off while the supply either stays the same or increases. Look at the new EOS3. Often it is priced higher than the EOS1!! Let those who must be first at any cost pay the price. The rest of us can save money and shoot more film. That is a good thing also.

-- Stan McManus (Stanshooter@yahoo.com), January 20, 1999.

One more thing. I do not think Nikon will discontinue the AF=D 80-200 anytime soom. Remember that Nikon has a number of older cameras and even the New N60 that cannot drive the Silent Wave lenses. Nikon will produce the 80-200 for quite a while since many Nikon owners don't have cameras that will use the SW lens.

-- Stanley Mcmanus (stanshooter@yahoo.com), January 20, 1999.

Talking about marketing. The importer of Nikon Products in Belgium (= De Beukelaer) really does not seem to care about their customers. For example; when you make a call to ask them about some info of 80-200 AFS or F100 they are just ignoring the question. About their prices: well they put a heavy price tag on their products during the release and that price remains unchanged for a decade. (F90x in 1994: 1250US$ - F90x in 1999: 1250 US$ !!!). Fluctuations of the Yen only have negative effects. I sincerely hope that one day Nikon Japan will import their own products in my country. (Grey import does not exist) Fortunately, prices in Germany are much better and keep following the market situation. Due to European Community regulations we can now freely buy our products across the border. I think the US Nikon customers cannot complain: prices are low due to fierce competition and a bigger market. In USA prices of AFS lenses will go down anyway. Just be patient.

-- Ivan Verschoote (ivan.verschoote@rug.ac.be), January 21, 1999.

noone's really answering my question(s) (maybe noone knows but nikon and canon)

yes, i believe the price on the 80-200 AFS will drop soon to $1300 just like the canon 70-200 L. but that's still MUCH more then the non-AS version. nikon users have always said "there's no way i'd pay $1300 for an 80-200". but that seems to be where the AFS version will settle down. and i'm sure even we hobbysts will buy it once the prices comes down from $2000 to $1300.

my two questions still are

1. does that fancy motor cost $500 to intall on a lens?

and

2. is that fancy motor worth $500 to photographers?

for #2 the canon users don't have a chioce. (unless you want to buy a used 80-200) but nikon users will. do you think people will dump their non AFS lenses to pay $500 for that fancy motor? do you think new buyers of 80-200s will pay the $500 premium for that fancy motor?

-- Sean Hester (seanh@ncfweb.net), January 21, 1999.

Let's not forget that this lens has 5 ED elements, versus 4 for previous designs. Let's also not forget that this is the first 80-200 lens that is comaptible with the TC-E converters. That makes this lens attractive to me. I have not choosen to buy an 80-200 in the past because I wanted/ needed the extra reach offered by the 75-300/4.5-5.6 -- there are times when I don't want to carry my 300/2.8. Since this new 80-200/2.8 can be turned into a 280/4 with just modest weight gain I'm hoping to be able to replace the slow 75-300 with this faster and more versitle combination.

-- Geof Grieble (ggrieble@gte.net), January 21, 1999.

When comparing USA prices to those in other countries keep in mind that various govenments offer many programs that the citizens have to pay for in some way. For example, Canadians get a national health care system while Americans have to buy health insurance. Perhaps the higher Canadian prices are a way of paying for that national health insurance. I know that the $4000 a year my friend pays for his family's health insurance policy would sure buy a lot of camera gear!

-- Stanley McManus (stanshooter@yahoo.com), January 21, 1999.

I recently read a user report that the new Sigma APO EX 1.4x works well with the two ring AF 80-200/2.8D and retains AF and D-matrix metering. It also costs $300 than the Nikon TC-14E or TC-14B.

-- Costas Dimitropoulos (costas@udel.edu), January 21, 1999.

There hae been many posts on this topic, so I will try to highlight a few new topics and clarify a few others:

There are several differences between the AF-S and pevious two-touch version of this lens. 1) This is a new optical formula of 18 elements in 14 groups as opposed to 16 elements in 11 groups (I am not sure how this actually differs but probably contributes to the true IF function of this lens), 2) the AF-S lens has 5 ED elements ( more than previous) and is a true IF lens, 3) The AF-S lens works well with the TC14E converter (and the TC20E but I have not tried it) 4) with the AF-S motor, the manual focus is activated full time during AF with no lag so you can go AF or manual instantly like the other AF-S lenses, 5) the large scalloped hood is included with the lens, 6) the AF-S lens has focus lock buttons on the barrel like its larger AF-S cousins so it can be locked and you can re-compose without changing a switch on the body or changing a slide switch on the lens, 7) the tripod foot has a different shape than the two-touch lens foot so it will require a different arca-style plate for some users, 8) the tripod collar is detachable so you can leave it off when only handholding, 9) The AF-S lens is a bit longer and wider throughout the barrel and weighs more, 1580g (3.5 lbs) vs 1300g for the two-touch, 10) Both lenses use a 9 blade iris so this is not different, 11) The US lense comes with a 5 year warranty...nice security, 12) The serial number on the US lenses are prefaced with a 'US' before the number so it will be easy to spot US vs grey for repair (still an unfortunate distinction).

As for price, many previous posts have speculated on the probability that the price will go down with time. I agree, but when. The lens is on allotment and probably will be for several (many??) months. I got one for $1499 so the rumors of $2000 are way off. For those of us that shoot lots of action, the convenience of the full-time manual focus, the focus lock capability, the TC14E compatability and the fact that when you mount this lens it is very much like other AF-S lenses you are using means you do not have to keep changing body settings in the heat of an event. And yes, as people switch to the AF-S there will be many of the two-touch lenses available which are also excellent.

Just my 2 cents worth. Good shooting!

-- Peter Bick (Bick@iquest.net), January 21, 1999.

Peter, where did you get your AF-S 80-200/2.8 lens from? $1500 does not look that bad. I am not interested right now to upgrade to AF-S, but I am curious about any store that gives you a lens with a 5 year US warranty for $300 less than B&H.

-- Costas Dimitropoulos (costas@udel.edu), January 21, 1999.

Costas, Robert's Distributors in Indianapolis Indiana is a large distributor of Nikon and Canon, Hassy (and other) equipment. They serve many of the high-profile shooters from national publications and agencies in the US. Sports Illustrated photogs for example is one customer group. Robert's gets a sizable allotment of new Nikon stuff when it comes out as a result. They also were the only photo equipment supplier (non-film) at the 1996 Atlanta Olympic games and they extended their business through those contacts. At any rate, the 5 year warranty is a Nikon program for their new lenses and is not a store warranty like those you hear about through B&H or others.

Since I live here in Indy I have dealt with Roberts for some time and their service is excellent. You can find better prices in New York on grey goods but service in an emergency is worth a lot. Having an NPS number also helps in getting on the allocation list for the new equipment. In some instances, such as the release of the 400/2.8 AF-S, Nikon actually shipped lenses to distributors with assignments to specific customers on the shipping invoice. They did this to be fair to the queue on the allocation listing in a time of high demand.

Lastly, I do not get any commission from Robert's. I just have a long relationship with them and they have served me very well. I also buy stuff elswhere as well.

They have a website at www.robertsimaging.com. If you want a name as a contact ask for Bruce Kwitny, he is the guru of the high-end stuff. They also have an extensive assortment of used stuff and send rental equipment all over the US (big glass, strobes and all). I was in there yesterday and counted 8-10 Nikon 400/2.8 AF-I's that were taken in trade (mostly for the AF-S lens). Good service without the attitude. For a little balance, I have also had good luck with Del's, Camera World of Oregon and M&M (before they were bought out). If anyone wants to extend this discussion or ask further questions, send me an email.

Good luck!

-- Peter Bick (Bick@iquest.net), January 21, 1999.