# For those who know... Nikon 80-200 Push Pull Worth $400?



## PhotoXopher (Nov 5, 2009)

There's one for sale locally and I don't know much about this lens since my recent research has been on the newer version and the Sigma version.

$400 seems pretty attractive, but if the lens is a big failure then well, not so much.

Any advice is greatly appreciated!


----------



## PatrickHMS (Nov 5, 2009)

I had a f/2.8 last summer, sold it on eBay for $595.00.  Don't know what they are going for now.

I liked the lens while I had it, just didn't like the size of the lens, but the glass was nice.


----------



## ann (Nov 5, 2009)

it will depend on the condition of the lens

i asked my dealer recently about the value of mine as i am thinking of selling it, and they told me between 500-600 dollars.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 5, 2009)

I've owned a couple of the very first 80-200 AF one-touch models--the pre-D model,both of them. The AF isn't super-fast on consumer bodies, but is faster on the D1 and D2 series bodies with their higher-torque motors. There was a D-capable one with one ring for zoom and focus as well, made beginning in 1992 I think.

This lens design is not quite as good as more recent lenses; the design is approaching 20 years old now, and there is some CA at the longer end of the focusing range, mostly noted when strong backlight meets silhouetted objects (tree branches, telephone wires) or really strong backlight,like outdoor lighting with an indoors person in front of it.

This lens has a couple things as pluses--it weighs almost a full POUND LESS than an 80-200 AF-S model...and it has no tripod ring on it...it was designed as a HAND-held telephoto zoom. Tripod mounts of the "sled" style are available from RRS and Kirk Enterprises. It has the fewest elements of any 80-200 or 70-200, plus ED glass, and it is pretty darned good when shooting right toward bright light sources; check the Pelican sign in this gallery. These images are going on eight years old now,and are pretty minimally processed.
80-200 AF-ED One-Touch samples Photo Gallery by Derrel at pbase.com

The one ring makes it a very fast,handy lens for manually focusing and zooming, but you must flip the AF/M switch to shift modes. For $400, it gives a lot of positives. I'm serious about the 15 and 3/4 ounce weight difference between this and the last 80-200 AF-S model. Consider that an 85mm f/1.8 AF-D is around four bills now--this has 80,105,135,150,200,all in one tube.


----------



## PhotoXopher (Nov 5, 2009)

Thanks everyone... sounds like it might be a decent value for a consumer lens if the condition is good.

I really appreciate all the info and history - whether I get it or not I enjoy learning about them just the same.

-Chris


----------



## PatrickHMS (Nov 5, 2009)

+1 to what Derrel said...

Even if you don't like it, you oughta be able to resell it for $400 or more.

Forgot to mention that the Nikon lens is T - O - N - S better built than is the Sigma (I have had both the Sigma APO and the Nikon lenses), and you can just hold it to feel the difference.


----------



## joemc (Nov 5, 2009)

PatrickHMS said:


> +1 to what Derrel said...
> 
> Even if you don't like it, you oughta be able to resell it for $400 or more.
> 
> Forgot to mention that the Nikon lens is T - O - N - S better built than is the Sigma (I have had both the Sigma APO and the Nikon lenses), and you can just hold it to feel the difference.




+1 and +2...lol


----------



## PhotoXopher (Nov 5, 2009)

Sounds like it's worth a go... if only I could find a buyer for my 18-250.


----------



## dhilberg (Nov 5, 2009)

N0YZE said:


> Sounds like it's worth a go... if only I could find a buyer for my 18-250.



Tried Craigslist? That's where I sold my Nikon 18-200. It was sold in like four days.


----------



## PhotoXopher (Nov 5, 2009)

Yeah, trying now... thanks for the reminder 

Still considering the new 80-200 f/2.8, I feel like this is a lens that will be with me for a long, long time.


----------



## itznfb (Nov 5, 2009)

N0YZE said:


> Yeah, trying now... thanks for the reminder
> 
> Still considering the new 80-200 f/2.8, I feel like this is a lens that will be with me for a long, long time.



If you're anything like me, a fast high quality 70-200 or 80-200 will become your new lover. My 70-200mm f/2.8G is the best toy I've ever purchased. Photography or not.


----------



## PhotoXopher (Nov 5, 2009)

I guess we have that in common (I think), I just ordered the new version


----------



## dhilberg (Nov 5, 2009)

:thumbup: You'll love it. My 80-200 two ring was definitely my finest photography-related purchase. Be prepared for the weight, I was kinda shocked. Par for the course with an f/2.8 zoom tele though.


----------



## PhotoXopher (Nov 5, 2009)

Yeah, 3 pounds of lens will take some getting used to I'm sure!


----------



## jdag (Nov 5, 2009)

Congrats on the 80-200.  I've had mine for about 45 days...and I don't think I've removed it from the camera yet.  Once you have the fast/constant 2.8 you'll never go back!


----------



## benhasajeep (Nov 5, 2009)

N0YZE said:


> Yeah, 3 pounds of lens will take some getting used to I'm sure!


 
It's the Nikon f/2.8 workout routine. Most start with light weights like 35-70 f/2.8's or 24-70 f/2.8's. Then as your strength builds up, you add a 80-200 or 70-200 f/2.8. And of course when you have gotten used to that weight range you toss in a 300 f/2.8. When your fully ready for the olympic trials. You should be in the 600 f/4 weight range. :lmao:

You will not be dissapointed in the lens.  Over 10 years now on my lens and still happy with it.


----------



## PatrickHMS (Nov 6, 2009)

benhasajeep said:


> N0YZE said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, 3 pounds of lens will take some getting used to I'm sure!
> ...


 
Who needs a Soloflex or Bowflex with 2 or 3 40lb gadget bags full of gear?


----------



## itznfb (Nov 6, 2009)

N0YZE said:


> Yeah, 3 pounds of lens will take some getting used to I'm sure!



It's not that bad. My 70-200 on my D90 was easy to walk around with all day. Just wait till you throw that telezoom on a metal body. 



benhasajeep said:


> N0YZE said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, 3 pounds of lens will take some getting used to I'm sure!
> ...



10 years huh? Do you have maintenance done on the lens? If so how often?


----------



## PhotoXopher (Nov 6, 2009)

I have a feeling the grip will be going back on in the near future.


----------



## benhasajeep (Nov 6, 2009)

N0YZE said:


> I have a feeling the grip will be going back on in the near future.


 
I am guessing a D90 and grip is similar to a D300 and grip.  If this is the case.  A gripped camera and using the lens tripod mount can be a pain deppending on the tripod head.  Definate interferance between the grip and head with all 3 of my heads.  Even with my 300 f/2.8 its a pain.  I had to resort to mounting the QR plate 90 degrees on the lens.  Works the same but gave more room for mounting and dismounting the whole combination.


----------



## PhotoXopher (Nov 6, 2009)

Should be OK, it's a Manfrotto 488 midi ball head, nothing to get in the way really. I've only used my tripod 3 times in almost a year though.


----------



## austriker (Nov 17, 2009)

PatrickHMS said:


> +1 to what Derrel said...
> 
> Even if you don't like it, you oughta be able to resell it for $400 or more.
> 
> Forgot to mention that the Nikon lens is T - O - N - S better built than is the Sigma (I have had both the Sigma APO and the Nikon lenses), and you can just hold it to feel the difference.



i am looking at a 80-200 f/2.8 as well and also i am looking at a sigma 70-200 f2.8 HSM I.. so are you saying that the older nikon one will be TONZ better than the sigma??


----------

