Yourlensreview - Lens - Nikkor AF-S 80-200 F/2.8D ED

Sharpness, bokeh, contrast, colors, everything

Nikon in all its wisdom discontinued this lens but it still produces the inferior AF-D 80-200..

This lens doesn't fit my Canon so obviously I don't own one, but I've had the chance to try one out for an entire day in a zoo on a D50. I now understand why the owner (the person below this review ;)) loves this lens.

The best I can compare it to is to the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM. Obviously it doesn't have IS/VR, but the image-quality is better. Especially the sharpness wide-open.

The drawback is that this lens is only available second hand. Nikon only produces the Nikon AF-S 70-200/2.8VR (costs alot more) or the inferior Nikon AF-D 80-200/2.8 which isn't as good. Also, this lens is highly sought after, just try to find one for a good price isn't as easy as it seems to be.

If it would fit my Canon, I'd buy one. ;)

- Sharpness
- Bokeh
- Focus Speed
- Build Quality
- Practically no distortions
- Practically no vignetting
- No Chromatic Abberations

- Discontinued
- Price (when found)
- Heavy

First of all: the AF-S 80-200/2.8 is in not to be confused with the AF-D 80-200/2.8. Not only they differ in focus speed, but the AF-S version is optically superior in every way. It produces beautiful bokeh (where the AF-D's bokeh is rather uptight) and produces incredibly sharp images. Concerning it's sharpness, there is almost no reason thinkable for stopping down this lens, because at f/2.8 it already produces great images, and except for pixel peepers, the difference between f/2.8 and f/4.0 for example is hardly noticeable.

Compared to the 70-200/2.8VR (of which it's it predecessor) there aren't to big differences. The AF-S 80-200/2.8 is a tiny bit sharper, the 70-200 produces a bit better bokeh. And of course the 70-200 has a VR motor, which can be of some importance if you shoot in low-light situations.

Verdict: this lens is great, and except for the 70-200VR, i wouldn't trade it for any other 70/80-200/2.8 around. I've compared it to the AF-D 80-200ED D, the 70-200VR ED D and the Sigma 70-200/2.8 Macro and non-macro, and except for the 70-200VR it has no equal. The heavy part of the lens is absolutely no issue for me, because those f/2.8 telezooms just ARE heavy. The only thing which could be improved (and was improved with the coming of the 70-200/2.8) is the tripod-collar. Now you have to screw it loose, which can take some time if you don't have a quick-release on your tri- or monopod.

If you can find this gem, it most certainly will cost you, but the lens is worth every single cent you pay for it.