Nikon ED 80-200 f2.8 or Canon 70-200 f2.8L ? at DVinfo.net

Luke Frater · October 5th, 2009, 06:59 PM

Hi there,

i'm looking for a solid telephoto zoom for my 7D, and its between these two lenses. I can get the Nikon ED 80-200 2.8 for about $900 US (roughly from the price here in NZ), or the Canon 70-200 2.8L (non IS) for about $1100-$1200 US. Has anyone had any experience with both? recommendations?

my thinking at the moment is the Nikon, as it is cheaper and i like the Nikon focus rings better (am i correct in that the Canon ring rotates infinitely?) as i intend to use this with a follow focus as well. I'd really like to hear some opinions though, thank you.

Daniel Bates · October 5th, 2009, 07:16 PM

The Canon's focus ring will indeed rotate infinitely, but there is a great deal more resistance when it is not actually moving an element (i.e., outside the range of movement).

I would strongly recommend the Canon, given the price difference. Having a lens that natively mounts, meters, and autofocuses is worth the extra $200-300 in my opinion.

Brian Luce · October 6th, 2009, 12:15 AM

Don't forget to check out the Tamron 70-200mm.

Tony Davies-Patrick · October 6th, 2009, 07:02 AM

In optical and visual image quality terms, either lens will deliver top-notch results in the right hands.

If you mainly use it for video, then I'd go for the Nikon Nikkor - as long as it is the earlier non "G" AF ID-EF version and not the latest versions without an aperture ring. It is superbly built, very sharp and nice to handle. AF with a DSLR in video mode is hardly worth the bother, and you'll be using the lens in MF anyway, so the Canon-Nikon adapter will not be a problem.

However, if you do a lot of stills photography as well and often need AF over the MF, then go for the Canon version.

October 5th, 2009, 06:59 PM	#1
Luke Frater New Boot Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 13	Nikon ED 80-200 f2.8 or Canon 70-200 f2.8L ? Hi there, i'm looking for a solid telephoto zoom for my 7D, and its between these two lenses. I can get the Nikon ED 80-200 2.8 for about $900 US (roughly from the price here in NZ), or the Canon 70-200 2.8L (non IS) for about $1100-$1200 US. Has anyone had any experience with both? recommendations? my thinking at the moment is the Nikon, as it is cheaper and i like the Nikon focus rings better (am i correct in that the Canon ring rotates infinitely?) as i intend to use this with a follow focus as well. I'd really like to hear some opinions though, thank you.

October 6th, 2009, 07:02 AM	#4
Tony Davies-Patrick Trustee Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Worldwide Posts: 1,589	In optical and visual image quality terms, either lens will deliver top-notch results in the right hands. If you mainly use it for video, then I'd go for the Nikon Nikkor - as long as it is the earlier non "G" AF ID-EF version and not the latest versions without an aperture ring. It is superbly built, very sharp and nice to handle. AF with a DSLR in video mode is hardly worth the bother, and you'll be using the lens in MF anyway, so the Canon-Nikon adapter will not be a problem. However, if you do a lot of stills photography as well and often need AF over the MF, then go for the Canon version. __________________ www.WILDCARP.com www.NIKON.me.uk

October 5th, 2009, 07:16 PM	#2
Daniel Bates Regular Crew Join Date: May 2006 Location: Daegu, Korea Posts: 180	The Canon's focus ring will indeed rotate infinitely, but there is a great deal more resistance when it is not actually moving an element (i.e., outside the range of movement). I would strongly recommend the Canon, given the price difference. Having a lens that natively mounts, meters, and autofocuses is worth the extra $200-300 in my opinion.

October 6th, 2009, 12:15 AM	#3
Brian Luce Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 2,290	Don't forget to check out the Tamron 70-200mm.