Worth upgrading nikkor 80-200mm 2.8 AF-D to a 70-200 AF-S VRI or II?

Molotov Everything

So I've been using my 80-200mm 2.8, the non-afs version, for shooting sports and I'm wondering if it would really be worth my while to upgrade to one of the 70-200mm AFS lenses, either the VRI or VRII.
Mostly this lens would be for sports, body is a D7000.
Since I'm ideally using high shutter speeds for sports, the fact that they have VR isn't particularly valuable to me. What would be of value to me is the speed of the autofocus.
I only own one AF-S lens, the 105mm macro, and it doesnt seem like the focus on that is that much faster, but it's a macro lens, I don't know if it's a fair comparison.
I read in some customer reviews that the VRII has some serious focus breathing issues on the closest focusing distance zoomed in, but I don't think that's an issue for sports, I can't imagine being 5 feet away from someone shooting at 200mm very often. Is the breathing still an issue at like... 10 feet? 15 feet? Was hard to find good info on this.

So basically, going by some quick research I think I could sell my lens for about $800, buy a VRI for about $1300 (so +500) and the VRII for about 2k (+1200).
Think either is worthwhile? Is there a third party alternative that's faster than the 80-200? Is the improvement small enough that I'd be better off using the money for something else?

Edit: one thing I don't like about the 80-200 is the little ring to switch between auto and manual focus. I prefer the little switch my 105mm has as well as the fact that you can just grab the ring to override autofocus at any time.

cab.in.boston

I haven't used your 80-200, and my only experience with either 70-200 is that I rented the VRI for a week. It was awesome, but my experience isn't enough to give you any real advice. I wanted to point you toward Thom Hogan's review of the VRII, in which he covers the focus breathing issue fairly thoroughly, in case you hadn't seen it yet. Link: http://bythom.com/nikkor-70-200-VR-II-lens.htm

Molotov Everything

Seymore wrote: »

IMPO, if the 80-200 is doing what you need it to do, why would you want to upgrade? But, your choice.

Well mostly because I'm wondering if maybe I'm missing out on something awesome that I'm just unaware of because I've never used either of the 70-200s. Like when I first got the 80-200 and thought "my god, all my other lenses are crap!"

And thank you cab for that link, it makes me lean towards the VR I more as it seems like on a crop sensor I won't be getting much more benefit for the money from the VRII

angevin1

Molotov Everything wrote: »

Well mostly because I'm wondering if maybe I'm missing out on something awesome that I'm just unaware of because I've never used either of the 70-200s. Like when I first got the 80-200 and thought "my god, all my other lenses are crap!"

And thank you cab for that link, it makes me lean towards the VR I more as it seems like on a crop sensor I won't be getting much more benefit for the money from the VRII

The Only thing you'll be missing is money!:D

I've had the 80-200 Af-ED IF lens. And I have had the VR2.
Yes. I think the Vr2 does AF faster than that old 80-200, but not by much: Maybe $20 bucks worth.
And no I don't think you're missing anything in the image dept.
Everybody and everything I read says the VR1 works just fine for Crop Cams.
The VR2 is the latest tech. It is improved!

If Vr is important, get one. If not. You can buy something else!

ARKreations

I currently have both the 80-200 and the 70-200 VRII (both used with my D300). While the VRII does focus considerably faster IMHO, the real benefit to me was the extra 10mm on the wide end. I also noticed that some of the dance work I shoot that the focus accuracy was noticeably better with the VRII. The real question is how much the cost difference worth to you in what you shoot? The 80-200 is an excellent lens for the money (especially since the used price has dropped a bit with the new releases). My secondary reason for buying the VRII is in preparation for jumping to full-frame at some point. If you intend to stick with crop sensors, the VR1 is a great compromise. A negative aspect of the VRII over the 80-200 is the weight - it is noticeably heavier. But now that I have one, I'll never be without it - it's just that good.

Wayupthere

cab.in.boston wrote: »

I wanted to point you toward Thom Hogan's review of the VRII, in which he covers the focus breathing issue fairly thoroughly, in case you hadn't seen it yet. Link: http://bythom.com/nikkor-70-200-VR-II-lens.htm

That is a good review. I will have to go back and reread "Normal vs Active VR" section..I have a lot to learn.
The mannequin shots in his yard were classic. I could just see a neighbor walking by and taking that in
Gary

Art Scott

Here is my 'umble opin' and statement purely for inner reflection not necessarily to be answered here.............If the lens is performing as you need it then it does not need replacing until you get to a point that it just will not do what you need it too........Are you wanting to replace this fine piece of glass because of all the hype about the newer lenses and I am including both VR 1 and ll, in that statement...or was your query here prompted because you are not getting the amount of keepers you want or truly need????
In my experience technique and your eye are more important than the extras that drive up the price of glass, I am still using glass that is not VR and use my VR glass with VR turned off 99% of the time, unless the wind is really blowing, but then I shoot off a tri or mono pod most of the time....

I do not shoot sports other than just as a hobby if I happen to go to a game when visiting my brother in NW Ark and he loves to go the Naturals games.....so I go and shoot merely for practice.......

Molotov Everything

Art, last sports game I shot, it's not that I didn't get enough keepers, but I did end up ditching some shots where I liked the action but the focus was off. Whether that was the lens, the body, or just me being too slow I'm not entirely sure (but I'm leaning towards the third more often than not).
I also don't care about the VR, I have one lens with VR as well, the 105mm macro, and never really use it with that either.
But at this point I'm not convinced I should be upgrading (now the 80-200 AF-S version, with the little switches I like so much is a thought too) so I don't know, I'll probably just see what I can rent and go from there.