I still can't believe the price difference between the new AFS 80-200 2.8 and and the 80-200D 2.8 (with the tripod) collar, about $850 vs $1500 at last look. I have heard that the older model is a bit slow in autofocus compared with the AFS, especially with certain cameras. What about with Nikon's faster bodies, notably the F100 and the F5? I wonder whether it is worth waiting for the price of the AFS to come down?

-- Jim Meyer (jim_meyer@compusa.com), June 11, 1999

Answers

I cannot compare the focus speed between the two versions since I never owned the 80-200 until the AFS version appeared. I can say that the AFS version focuses very quickly, but there are other differences that should be noted:

1) The AFS can be used with the TCE converters, -previous versions cannot. 2) The AFS version is the sharpest yet and has an additional ED element. 3) The lense is an absolute joy to use - manual focussing is fast and easy to do - no levers to switch between AF and Manual F modes.

I'd suggest you try both versions at your dealer (if you can) and then decide.

-- Geof Grieble (ggrieble@gte.net), June 11, 1999.

Jim, I tried both of these lenses and cannot tell much difference in focusing speed. The real advantage of the new AFS IMHO is the instant switch to manual focus and the ability to use the AF-I TC's. I have also read that the new version might be slightly sharper, but considering the quality of both lenses, I'm not sure how apparent this will be on film. It's a nice kind of problem though, you would win either way!

-- Robert Smith (glle@ptdprolog.net), June 15, 1999.

One thing to consider is that the AFS version will not AF with older AF Nikon cameras that do not support AFS. e.g. N8008,N6006. The new AFS lens does not have the AF mechanical coupling that the non-AFS has.

-- Shannon (shong@lhc.qld.edu.au), June 18, 1999.

I've been following articles and tests about the 80-200 AFS since it was introduced. I've seen at least 3 tests where the the new AFS does not really perform much better then the latest AFD (tripod version). IMHO this lens is also too big to be comfortable (I've handled one). The only improvement is the smoothness of the AF.

Even the new 28-70 AFS is really not convincing (optically it only seems slightly better than the new Sigma EX). I think owners of the old 35-70/2.8 would not gain quality if they trade in their superb standard zoom. Same story with owners of all previous versions of 80-200/2.8.

-- Ivan Verschoote (ivan.verschoote@rug.ac.be), June 18, 1999.

The main advantage of the 80-200 AF-S is that it operates with the TC- 14E and TC-20E teleconverters, and provides excellent optical results. This fact alone makes the lens worth it for me and most of the photographers I know who own one.

-- Danny Weber (danny_weber@compuserve.com), June 18, 1999.

How many times have I heard people ask for a Nikkor 400mm f/5.6 autofocus lens? With the TC-20e on the AFS 80-200, you essentially have one, and it's a fair lens combo at that (albeit a little dark, but the 400mm f/2.8 AFS lens is a little pricey at over $7500)... and you also get zoom capability.

-- Kristen Marie Robins (kristen@cisco.com), July 29, 1999.

It is not as much the AF speed that really makes it better but the ability for the AF to react. I notice during tracking on the F100 it is much better than my previous version (AFD/non tripod collar).

It is bulkier to handle but considering that, the AF snaps to quicker, I regularly use the TC14e with wonderful results (and great AF performance), and it is very quiet.

If you have no desire to longer via the converters and are not doing sports type photography you would be more than happy with the non AFS version.

Me I love this lens and when Nikon finally releases a 300/4AFS my kit will be complete.

-- Warren Gleich (wgleich@silknet.com), September 27, 1999.