Hand held Nikon 80-200mm 2.8

lifeinfocus

Since the Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-D NIKKOR ED lens does not have VR and it weighs a fair amount - 46 oz., can it be hand held for indoor shots with little loss in shutter speed?

In comparison: Nikon 24-70mm weighs - 32 oz., and 70-200mm VRII weighs - 54 oz., .


Thanks, Phil

Zerodog

I have the 80-200 AFS. It is bigger and heavier. Yes, you can handhold inside outside or where ever you want.

VR helps but it is not a cure for terrible technique. The AFD and AFS are fantastic lenses for the money. No reason on earth not to use it. I still have my 80-200 to use as backup for my 70-200. I shot with it for the first time in a long time this summer and found it to be every bit as good as I remembered.

Icebear

Obviously, high ISO is your friend. It's at the point now that a high ISO capable body is a heck of a lot cheaper than upgrading a lens. Hooda thunk it.

Molotov Everything

I use that lens to shoot roller derby and hand hold it. I usually sit on the floor and be a 'human tripod,' propping my elbow on my knee, but I've never felt the need to bring a real tripod or monopod with me.

Art Scott

It really comes down to style...your shooting style.... .... do you tuck your elbows into your ribcage tightly, do you do a cross arm pistol type grip or just he throw your arms up and shoot.....I can't find the link and do not even remember exactly who it was showing extremely sturdy handheld shooting positions for lower shutter speeds........When I shot concerts with film I was asked by a performer if I ever hurt myself from the way I wraped my self up to shoot and Like I told him...My muscles get more sore from shooting a concert than from spending a half day lifting weights or shooting my 100# hunting compound bow......and I still shoot that way because it is against most fire codes in the US to have any type of pod with you....especially for a still photog.....and when out in the woods shooting wildlife there are times I can't get my pod set up and ready to go if I want to get the shot.....

When I started shooting concerts I did not have fast glass......finally I got my fast 70-120 zoom...F2.8-3.5 and damn I was in heaven ...but then I learned to shoot in manual and so the lens was always at f3.5 and that was a dream.....

angevin1

lifeinfocus wrote: »

Since the Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-D NIKKOR ED lens does not have VR and it weighs a fair amount - 46 oz., can it be hand held for indoor shots with little loss in shutter speed?

In comparison: Nikon 24-70mm weighs - 32 oz., and 70-200mm VRII weighs - 54 oz., .


Thanks, Phil

Phil, that sounds like a really strange question. Though Icebear (John) answered it fully, I think; ISO. As Did ArtScott; technique

"... can it be hand held for indoor shots with little loss in shutter speed?"

That will always depend on ISO and Aperture.

The triad is this: ISO/Shutter-Speed/Aperture.

Need more Shutter-Speed? Give it more ISO or larger Aperture.

If you're talking about natural light, inside and so on. Your technique as well as the subject matter will dictate what you can get away with in Shutter speed. I like to shoot 125th min. most times But if we follow the rules for Tele/Zooms. Then at 200mm focal length you ought to be 200th to 300th Shutter speed to effect a reliable result.

You could say that technique is everything. But then so is light and many other variables.:D

lifeinfocus

Wow, quick excellent response!

Sorry, I should have been more clear in my question and said more about ISO, hand holding etc. I bought a mint used D700 a few months back primarily because of low noise at higher ISO. Yes, I understand exposure triangle, as a matter of fact I registered www.exposuretriangle.com etc. and I am considering starting a small tutorial website with it. And I do tuck my arms in my chest. I also have been hitting the gymn (Planet Fitness) to better hand hold heavier lenses.

Perhaps a better question is how much of shutter speed penalty, if any, could I expect using same ISO and excellent hand holding technique with a non VR 80-200mm lens? 1/15th, 1/30th, 1/60th of a second?

Again thanks for your responses.

Phil

Art Scott

lifeinfocus wrote: »

Wow, quick excellent response!

Sorry, I should have been more clear in my question and said more about ISO, hand holding etc. I bought a mint used D700 a few months back primarily because of low noise at higher ISO. Yes, I understand exposure triangle, as a matter of fact I registered www.exposuretriangle.com etc. and I am considering starting a small tutorial website with it. And I do tuck my arms in my chest. I also have been hitting the gymn (Planet Fitness) to better hand hold heavier lenses.

Perhaps a better question is how much of shutter speed penalty, if any, could I expect using same ISO and excellent hand holding technique with a non VR 80-200mm lens? 1/15th, 1/30th, 1/60th of a second?

Again thanks for your responses.

Phil

the rule: a shutter speed equal tpo or faster tha the lens focal length......you going by the rule you should never shoot slower than 1/200 ... .... I have handheld my old 70-210 as slow as 1/15 and gotten usable sharp prints....again alot has to do with technique .... ...

ziggy53

Higher shutter speeds help with both camera shake and subject movement. VR cannot help with either subject movement. A relatively fast shutter speed is best for sharp images, not VR.

To that end, the combination of a Nikkor 80-200mm, f2.8D ED and Nikon D700 body are very nice.

Do be aware that the Nikkor 70-200mm, f2.8G AF-S ED VR II is a bit faster to focus.

Zerodog

What Ziggy said is true. The D version does not focus as fast. If you have not bought your lens yet you might want to hunt for a nice version of the 80-200AFS. It focuses as fast as the VR versions. Most consider it to be a better lens than the VR1. The downside is it will most likely cost as much as a brand new D.

I would say there is no hard rule on how much penalty. It all depends on the situation. VR doesn't fix motion blur from the subject moving. Only your own handshake. So you need to have a high enough speed for the situation. If you are shooting sports indoors you will not be able to get crisp shots at 1/125. If you are shooting a concert? 1/125 could be great. Everything is a compromise. You have to find a balance for every situation. The D700 will give you tons of room for ISO. Don't be afraid to use it. I shoot mine at 4000 a lot and even push it up to 6400 with good results.

lifeinfocus

Thank you gentlemen. I had not looked at the 80-200AFS but I will put it on my worksheet to do a comparison for my online shopping excursion.

I just found a good comparison of the 70/80 to 200mm Nikon lenses at http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/80-200mm-history.htm

After reviewing Ken Rockwell's comparison and discussion of the D vs AFS 80-200mm versions, I think the D version would meet my needs. I may do some indoor sports for fun, but looking to use it more for indoor events - Vacation Bible School, anniversaries, maybe wedding (only started to do these) and portraits. Ken Rockwell says its autofocus is maybe 20% slower than AFS and VRII versions. Therefore, I am hoping that it would be sufficient to meet the categories of photo ops as I listed.

I have been looking at other lenses to meet the 2x to 70mm range. Love to get the 24-70mm but just can't afford it and still be able to get 70/80-200mm lens.

I enjoy posting to this site and the interaction.

Phil