the first 3 versions of the 80-200/2.8 AF

[richardHaw]

Hello. I am starting this thread to get some discussion going with these 3 lenses. I hope you can chip in with your recollection of these lenses.
The mailman just delivered the 1st version to me yesterday and now I can make some user impressions of the 3 earlier lenses.

• v1: slow AF, reasonably sharp. slight tendency to front focus at minimum distance at 200mm (mine at least), push-pull, extends when focusing.
• v2: faster AF, the sharpest I had, known to have a tendency to back focus at minimum distance at 200mm, push-pull, IF.
• v3: fastest AF, not as sharp as v2, also has the same tendency to back focus at minimum distance at 200mmm 2-ring and tripod foot, IF.

the backfocusing issue seem to have stem from the lens being serviced the wrong way. In my experience with zooms I find that you will have to calibrate the focus and sharpness for both ends of the zoom range and the middle one as well if you care. here's the funny thing, I have tested v3 lenses that were sold NEW and they also show the tendency to backfocus  this wasn't apparent with film camera but it shows with digital bodies. I remember how the internet was ablaze (at least at DPreview) about this issue during the days of the D300. I had v3 for some time and I used it with my D700, it did exhibit this problem so when I was shooting events I would focus on the client's nose just to get her eye in-focus  If I focused on the eye then the ear would be focused. Pity it was such a capable lens.

given the experience of people here in this group, I am sure we can make a nice map of how these 3 performs.

[Roland Vink]

To the best of my knowledge, the three AF 80-200/2.8 ED versions are the same optically. Of course there is the possibility that the optics were refined slightly along the say, and coatings may have improved also, but they are at least broadly the same. So any sharpness differences should be due to sample variation and the accuracy of focusing.

All focus by extension (the front group moves forward when focusing closer). In V2 and V3 the front barrel is longer so the extension occurs within the barrel, giving the impression of an internally focusing lens. It's only when you get to the AF-S 80-200 that you get a completely new optical system with true IF.

Could the back-focus be due to focus shift on stopping down?

[Seapy]

I have the push pull 'IF' version, no tripod foot.

I bought it soon after my D1 back 5th March 2006.  I use it for motorsport, football, rugby, horse trials and anything else that calls for a medium tele zoom, very robust lens, been out in all weathers the D1, D200's, D300S and now my D3.

Sharp enough for me, autofocus spot on, 2016 used it at Rockingham Mini Challenge races; car travelling about 130MPH, @ 200mm, panning from the pit wall gave me this image hand held, no monopod.



This is a 100% crop. D3,  1/400 Second @ f/9.0, ISO-250

[richardHaw]

To the best of my knowledge, the three AF 80-200/2.8 ED versions are the same optically. Of course there is the possibility that the optics were refined slightly along the say, and coatings may have improved also, but they are at least broadly the same. So any sharpness differences should be due to sample variation and the accuracy of focusing.

All focus by extension (the front group moves forward when focusing closer). In V2 and V3 the front barrel is longer so the extension occurs within the barrel, giving the impression of an internally focusing lens. It's only when you get to the AF-S 80-200 that you get a completely new optical system with true IF.

Could the back-focus be due to focus shift on stopping down?

I have ruled-out the focusing inaccuracy factor. it really is the optics
i suspect it's your other point which is sample variation. my pet theory is repairmen putting the elements cells back without calibrating them

[richardHaw]

I have the push pull 'IF' version, no tripod foot.

I bought it soon after my D1 back 5th March 2006.  I use it for motorsport, football, rugby, horse trials and anything else that calls for a medium tele zoom, very robust lens, been out in all weathers the D1, D200's, D300S and now my D3.

Sharp enough for me, autofocus spot on, 2016 used it at Rockingham Mini Challenge races; car travelling about 130MPH, @ 200mm, panning from the pit wall gave me this image hand held, no monopod.



This is a 100% crop. D3,  1/400 Second @ f/9.0, ISO-250

I found this version to be the sharpest at least in my experience...

I remember 3rd party manufacturers making tripod feet for these...I wonder how much these are selling for now 

[Seapy]

I remember 3rd party manufacturers making tripod feet for these...I wonder how much these are selling for now 

I don't see where the foot could be attached/clamped to the lens body. If I could find a picture of one I would make one.  It's a very heavy lens to be hanging so far off the lens mount, not just the weigh but leverage too.

[Seapy]

Have taken it out of the lens cupboard and had a good look.  The only place I can see is around the front of the lens, there is a 20mm margin which a well fitting clamp could be used but then it means that the entire weight of the camera (D3) is hanging on the front of the lens, plus any handling forces in holding the assembly in adverse conditions scrambling up steep ground or across muddy fields etc.

The only thing I can see being practical and strong is to clamp around the front of the lens, then have a long nodal bar attached to the camera tripod mount and the front clamp.  Strong but messy if lens changing is called for...

And yes, the front element does move during focus, significantly but it's inside the body of the lens and the filter/lens hood mount does not turn or move.

My lens has what looks like a bayonet mount for a lens hood and the 72mm filter threads.

I can't find a lens number anywhere.  Any suggestions where to look?

[richardHaw]

by the way, if i am not mistaken there is an advisory in the user manual that at 200mm and shot at 1.5m the backfocus problem will show itself on some digital cameras like the D90 and D300 

[richardHaw]

https://www.photoproshop.com/Lens-Gear/Lens-Tripod-Collars/Lens-Collar-Nikon-80-200-AF-D.html

Seapy, this is the link  I found it!

[Seapy]

Seapy, this is the link  I found it!

Thanks Richard, much appreciated.  Might well make one of those...  Mmmmm.  That chunk of Aluminium is coming in handy again.

[richardHaw]

Thanks Richard, much appreciated.  Might well make one of those...  Mmmmm.  That chunk of Aluminium is coming in handy again.

there has to be a better design that this
i believe that this can be improved 

[richardHaw]

https://page.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/j500164807

a cheap chinese one 

[Asle F]

https://page.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/j500164807

a cheap chinese one 

The picture says AF-S, and all the text I am able to read also says AF-S

[Seapy]

The picture says AF-S, and all the text I am able to read also says AF-S

My lens is not AFS...

That bracket was what I envisaged as being unsuitable design because it can only clamp at the front of my lens due to the large (long) zoom ring.

The Kirk is as good as it's going to get for my lens and it's well within my scope to make.  Although after twelve years without one I'm not really panicking about it...

[Akira]

The picture says AF-S, and all the text I am able to read also says AF-S

Asle, you are right.  This is for the AF-S version.