Steve'sDigicams

eburrows · Sep 28, 2005, 2:39 PM

I rented the Nikon 80-400 VR to try it out hiking in the mountains a few weeks ago, and was happy with the image and build quality. However, as so many have noted, it's auto-focus is gawd awful slow. Using the focus limit button helps, but it's still nowhere near AF-S.

I know the lens has been out for a while, but does anyone have any insight into if Nikon will upgrade it to AF-S?

And more to the point: Should I wait to see if they do upgrade it, or come out with something better before my trip to Ireland in 9 months?

And yes, before you all jump on me to buy the 200-400 VR or 70-200 VR, I have considered them, but they have neither the range nor cost that I am looking for.

murphyc · Nov 24, 2005, 3:37 AM

Yeah, 80-400 would have been great coverage for shooting football this fall, but both the slow focusing speed plus slow aperature kept me from going that route. An 80-400 AF-S 2.8 for say $1,000. Ahh, we can all dream, can't we? :G

NHL · Nov 24, 2005, 7:40 AM

Have you check out the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 EX?

I have the Canon 100-400L IS which is quite similar to the Nikon 80-400 VR, but it's USM instead, but my Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 EX is head and shoulder above it in term of AF speed - i.e. it's HSM ultrasonic fast and silent!
http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=66

... even with a 2x TC (@ 600mm f/5.6):
http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=65

-> IMO the Sigma is absolutely a steal if you compare it to a 300 f/2.8 of any brand :idea:

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Steve'sDigicams

Recent Camera Reviews

Most Active Forums

Most Popular Deals

Latest Feature Articles

Sep 28, 2005, 2:39 PM	#1
eburrows Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 24	I rented the Nikon 80-400 VR to try it out hiking in the mountains a few weeks ago, and was happy with the image and build quality. However, as so many have noted, it's auto-focus is gawd awful slow. Using the focus limit button helps, but it's still nowhere near AF-S. I know the lens has been out for a while, but does anyone have any insight into if Nikon will upgrade it to AF-S? And more to the point: Should I wait to see if they do upgrade it, or come out with something better before my trip to Ireland in 9 months? And yes, before you all jump on me to buy the 200-400 VR or 70-200 VR, I have considered them, but they have neither the range nor cost that I am looking for.

Nov 24, 2005, 3:37 AM	#2
murphyc Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 269	Yeah, 80-400 would have been great coverage for shooting football this fall, but both the slow focusing speed plus slow aperature kept me from going that route. An 80-400 AF-S 2.8 for say $1,000. Ahh, we can all dream, can't we? :G

Nov 24, 2005, 7:40 AM	#3
NHL Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333 Posts: 11,599	Have you check out the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 EX? I have the Canon 100-400L IS which is quite similar to the Nikon 80-400 VR, but it's USM instead, but my Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 EX is head and shoulder above it in term of AF speed - i.e. it's HSM ultrasonic fast and silent! http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=66 ... even with a 2x TC (@ 600mm f/5.6): http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=65 -> IMO the Sigma is absolutely a steal if you compare it to a 300 f/2.8 of any brand :idea: