# Nikon AF VR 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED?



## forzaF1 (Sep 22, 2006)

I have been looking to get a replacement of my 70-300mm ED lens for a while for my new D200. It's just a bit pricey, but that's OK. What do you guys thing of this lens? ANy suggestions? Thanks a lot.

-John


:bouncy:


----------



## JDP (Sep 22, 2006)

17 elements in 11 groups
Slowest AF system of any Nikkor lens, ever, to help with stability
even slower with VR on
lowest distortion you'll see in a zoom lens of this range
even with 17 elements, there's no ghosting, no flare
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]no light falloff on film at full aperture and little edge softening

Ken Rockwell says (well the above was his too):
[/FONT]_[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] This          lens is a miracle. I bought one in August 2002. It's small, sharp, light          and has very little distortion and flare, possibly the only 80-400 zoom          on the planet that can do this. Not only this, but the VR feature actually          works, allowing you to shoot this long lens handheld in all sorts of light.          [/FONT]_

I've rented it before, and indeed it does perform.


----------



## dsp921 (Sep 22, 2006)

Depends what you want to use it for.  If you can deal with the slow focus you'll be happy, it does hunt a bit sometimes, too.  If you don't  need to go to 400mm check out the 80-200 f/2.8, and if you have some spare change you're looking to spend the 70-200 f/2.8 VR is quickly becoming a legend.
Check out Thom Hogan's reviews, and Bjorn Rorslett's as well.  Much better resource than Rockwell, IMO.
http://www.bythom.com/nikon.htm
www.naturfotograf.com


----------



## Tiberius (Sep 22, 2006)

I'd avoid it for sports - the AF just doesn't cut it.  For anything else, though, it's quite a nice lens.


----------



## airgunr (Sep 23, 2006)

While it is marginally slower in the AF then the other lenses in the line it's not that bad.  As stated I would not use it for sports but otherwise it is a very good lens.  I have not found it to be problem in "Hunting" for focus anymore than some others.

Certainly it isn't quite as sharp as the 70-200VR but you won't notice it until you really start to blow the pictures up larger than and 8x10.

Over all I'm very happy with mine.


----------



## forzaF1 (Sep 23, 2006)

I tried one out today at Wolf Camera, along with the 70-200mm VR. I was amazed by the 70-200mm. I think my mind's made up. Thanks a lot for your opinions, guys.

-John


----------

