I've decided to go with a non-S version of a Nikon F2.8, 80-200 lens for use on an F5 (not yet purchased). I will use autofocus greater than 90% of the time. I am not knowledgeable regarding the various versions of this lens. I don't even know if all of them are autofocus. Which versions should I consider & which of these is likely to give me the greatest bang for the buck? I assume there are no lemons in the various options. Is this right? Thanks,

-- Chris Hawkins (peace@clover.net), January 19, 1999

Answers

Since you want to get the F5, go for the newer two-ring, tripod collar version which as you probably know can be found new with US warranty for around $800. The difference of this lens and an older used version is around $300 and not worth it considering you will put the lens on the F5, with which you will be able to autofocus very quickly.

I can't recommend any third-party teleconverters since I haven't used any. I would say to avoid paying too much since you may want to get a 300/4 instead of them (ok its bulkier, but it is also better). For TCs, a good idea would be to go to a store with your camera and lens to check them out yourself: Shoot a few rolls of slide film on a grey-card and a clear sky to check vignetting and light fall-off, as well as a newspaper to check sharpness.

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

If you'll use AF 90% of the time, you should give a second round of serious consideration to the AF-S version, which will give you the fastest AF of the 80-200/2.8s.

Here they are, though, in chronological order.

The 80-200/2.8 ED AF, first AF version, has AF so slow as to be almost useless. You can read Phil's comments in photo.net. The front filter rotates when focusing. It is a one-ring, push-pull type zoom, ideal for manually focusing and composing although zoom creep is a problem. It focuses about a foot closer than the next "D" version.

The 80-200/2.8D ED AF has noticeably faster AF, and the front filter ring doesn't rotate when focusing or zooming. Contrary to popular belief, it is not an IF lens. It is a one-ring, push-pull zoom, again ideal for manual use with the zoom creep caveat. It, too, lacks a tripod collar. Tripod collars will set you back about $100, although I've seen a few going for around $60 at eBay (some of the few relative bargains I've seen there). You have to make sure you get the right tripod collar, because the non-D and D versions have different outside diameters. I have this lens, with a Ni-Cam collar which works very well. AF is adequate on my N90s.

The 80-200/2.8D EDIF AF has a built-in tripod collar, and two-ring controls. As a result, zoom creep is negligible. It has faster AF and, apocryphally, newer and better coatings. It focuses about a foot closer than the previous D version. These are beginning to be available used from all the people who are upgrading to the AF-S.

Which brings us to the AF-S. Tripod collar, fastest AF, newest technology.

Hope this helps.

-- John Kuraoka (kuraoka@home.com), January 19, 1999.

John, I believe all AF versions of this lens focus to 4.9 feet, and none of them have internal focusing except the AF-S version.

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

That's what I get, Danny, for thinking Nikon literature was exactly accurate. 8-) Too many versions to keep track of -- you'd think they'd get it right and stick with it, like they did with the 300/4. Oops.

-- John Kuraoka (kuraoka@home.com), January 19, 1999.

Sorry Danny, but I think you're wrong. The two-touch 80-200 2.8 is IF.

-- (shooter@shoot.net), January 20, 1999.

IF-- Internal Focus; a focus system wherein lens elements or groups move within the lens barrel, but the barrel length remains fixed and the front element does not rotate.

-- (shooter@shoot.net), January 20, 1999.

No, "Shooter", it is you who are wrong. The AF 80-200/2.8 is not IF in any version, including the current one. If you look at the front, you will see that the focus mechanism moves the front groups inside a tube that keeps the filter from rotating and maintains the overall length, but the front element both extends and rotates.

The lens is not marked IF, nor does any Nikon literature refer to it that way.

-- Danny Weber (danny_weber@compuserve.com), January 20, 1999.

Danny, the following definition was taken from B&H's webpage. "IF-- Internal Focus; a focus system wherein lens elements or groups move within the lens barrel, but the barrel length remains fixed and the front element does not rotate." The two-touch version of the 80-200 2.8 follows that definition.

-- (shooter@shoot.net), January 20, 1999.

The lens you should get is the new AF-S lens, but it is too expensive since it is so new. Here is what I would do. I would pick up a used or grey market version of this lens with the two rings and the tripod collar. This version focuses about 25% faster than the older one collar zoom. My guess is that in a year or so the AF-S will fall so much in price that you will be able to purchase it for at lest 1/3rd less than today. Then you can keep your old zoom, if you wish, or sell it to help pay for the new one. It is very possible that this stragegy make make it able to have both zooms for the same cost as buying just the AF-S today.

Skip buying a TC for the non AF-s version of the zoom unless you have a rational business reason to do so. Get the TC's for the AF-S when you purchase that lens. That is what I would do and am pretty close to doing!

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

Whenever Nikon uses the "IF" designation, it usually means that the elements/groups that are used in focusing reside between the front & rear elements/groups of the lens.

The two-touch Nikkor 80-200 f2.8 by that definition is not a true "IF". If you were to look at the front elements of this lens during focusing, you could see that these elements move back and forth. However, the outer barrel does not rotate or move. This design facilitates filter usage.

By constrast, Canon 70-200 f2.8 is a true "IF". During focusing, you could see inner elements/groups move with the outer glass fixed in its position.

Keep in mind that there are many Nikkor rear focusing lens and do not carry the "IF" designation.

-- Andrew Hsiai (ah@nylaic.com), January 20, 1999.

Stanley, Isn't the biggest advantage of AF-S technology the ability to easily switch between AF and MF without having to flip switches, push buttons, etc?

That said, I would agree with your advice, the latest two touch version is indeed better than the previous versions.

-- Geoffrey S. Kane (grendel@pgh.nauticom.net), January 20, 1999.

I don't know that I want to get into the middle of this ... but here goes.

Both my 1995 and 1996/7 Nikon product catalogs say "80-200 2.8D ED-IF" in reference to the push-pull D model. They are wrong, and that right there should have tipped me off to the folly of quoting Nikon literature. I own this lens, I'm looking at it right now, and it is not IF; when I focus, I can see the front element moving (and rotating) back and forth behind the stationary filter ring.

That having been said, I'll quote that same Nikon literature : "With IF, only an internal small lens group shifts during focusing, which doesn't increase the size of the lens barrel. The IF lens is smaller, weighs less, and still achieves crisp, sharp focusing."

In other words, fixed lens barrel length is an effect of IF, but not necessarily proof of IF.

-- John Kuraoka (kuraoka@home.com), January 20, 1999.

John, you are right the earlier catalogs incorrectly called this lens IF (the lenses themselves are not so marked). The 1998 lens catalog corrects this mistake and shows the 80-200/2.8D on page 10 without "IF" indications.

Shooter, the definition from B&H's website is incomplete. Internal focus means just that--focusing is accomplished by moving *internal* groups in the lens. The 80-200 moves the front elements, but the extended collar hides this fact from casual observers. Unfortunately, this misses one of IF's biggest advantages, which is much faster focusing because of the relative small mass and short throw required.

Further, having IF does not automatically mean that the front doesn't rotate and extend. The 24-120 and 28-200 are both true IF lenses; however, they both extend and rotate when zoomed from short to long lengths.

Get yourself a copy of the 1998 lens catalog and you'll see which lenses are IF, which are RF (rear focusing), and which are neither, including the 80-200/2.8.

-- Danny Weber (danny_weber@compuserve.com), January 21, 1999.

having a stationary filter ring is a SIDE EFFECT of internal focus. it's not the test for it.

if i take a lens and build a housing around it so the front of the lens doens't move during focus, that doesn't make it internal focus.

internal focus means the a teeeeny group (or groups) of glass buried inside the lens focuses. this has the advantage of faster focusing (just becasue of the lower mass of the teeeeny elements compared to the huge front one)

there are lots of rear focus lenses that have stationary fronts but aren't internal focus either. they are rear focus. this has most of the advantages of internal focus, though, so they are sometimes interchanged in the marketing hype.

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