Gear Talk > Lens Talk
AF 80-200mm f/2.8D ED (Two Touch) Reputation...
David H. Hartman:
--- Quote from: MEPER on January 07, 2021, 20:20:48 ---OK, so you already have the lens and just wanted a 2nd opinion about its "special" performance?
--- End quote ---
I read in the past that the AF 80-200/2.8D ED (two touch) had poor image sharpness at close range. When testing on my new D850 I took one outstandingly sharp photo (an AF error in my favor) and then a bunch of improperly focused photos. If the lens could talk what it was saying was I can't deliver great images but not for you. >:(
If I needed an 80-200/2.8 for my F3 I'd want to keep this lens. Since I can't envision ever shooting anything but ISO 400 b&w with my F3 and wouldn't use such a heavy lens with the F3, well I don't need the AF 80-200/2.8D ED anymore.
I wanted a second opinion that the problem with the lens is an AF problem not its ability to form a great image. The problem I'm seeing on my D850 didn't show up with my F4s or F5 as outline in Richard's articles.
Dave
David H. Hartman:
Richard,
I just read the paragraph from your article on the AF 80-200/2.8D ED N (late single touch). Maybe I'm slow but I'm not sure where the change comes in cameras that don't focus properly with some of these lenses at 7m and down. If I had my D300s handy I'd check but I'm not at the location so I can't grab it.
Is the D300s a Yah or a Nay for proper AF at 7m and closer?
Thanks!
Dave
Is the problem found with cameras that have 3D Matrix Metering systems? Any chance using center-weighted meter cures this AF malady? Wishful thinking? :(
I'm trying to remember what I once knew and what didn't matter much for a time.
arthurking83:
I had this with my D300 back in the day.
Had it for a good year(minimum), and at the time was happy enough, but just something not 100% right.
Overall IQ, colour, bokeh, etc ... was superlative! In that respect one of my favourite lenses.
But at 200mm and f/4 or less, not the sharpest lens, made worse with misfocus issues.
Test the then new Tamron 70-200/2.8(non VC, very first edition) .. so much better sharpness, and 99.9% as good in other measures of IQ by comparison.
More importantly it allowed easier refocus as required, where the 80-200 required the A-M ring to be moved first, then focus adjusted as needed. Too clunky, and then from reading of it, this A-M focus locking ring was all too fragile to be using with regularity.
Unsealed front lens element meant dust inside lens within a day of using it!
I hate UV/protective filters, but this lens required it to make it sealed in some sense.
Loved the lens, hated it's vices ... Tamron had a better alternative at the time.
BUT! ... if you ever needed a hammer on a spur of the moment situation .. the 80-200 AF-D lens would provide for 'ya!
If you really want a lens of this focal range, I'd strongly argue that the Tamron is better most of the time.
If you want smoother bokeh than the already smooth Tamron can provide and for a decent price range .. then the 80-200 AF-D could be better, considering it'd also make a good emergency carpenters' tool too.
Peter:
I had a decent one but didn't like the front heavy feel.. I would love a VR but i see so many for parts and repair on Ebay with Failed motors and stuck zooms and they are God awful expensive!!
I just stayed with my 180mm f2.8 ED AF-D.
longzoom:
Sorry.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version