The question is which lens. The Nikkor 2.8 is out of the question price-wise. I am looking at the Nikkor 70-200 f4 instead of the Tamron 2.8 due to weight for use with the D750. Other than DOF considerations of 2.8 vs 4, with the supposedly higher performance of the D750 would an F4 lens be OK? Or will I be regretting the loss of the 2.8 indoors?
80-200 mm f/4.5. It was similar to the previous lens, but with only 12 elements in 9 groups gave even better performance. It also had a 52 mm filter and 6' or 1.8m close focus. It weighed a little less at 26.5 oz. or 750 g. The easiest way to tell it apart from the earlier model is its rectangular rear blind.
What is the difference between Nikon Nikkor Z 70-200mm f/2.8 VR S and Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8E FL ED VR? Find out which is better and their overall performance in the camera lens ranking.
For someone used to handling an 80-200 F2.8 for 20 years, picking up the 70-200F4 was just amazing - what a nice small light package! While I have the Holy Trinity of F2.8 zooms (14-24, 24-70 and 70-200), I can certainly appreciate the size benefit of the F4 trinity of 16-35, 24-120 and 70-200 zooms.
However when I moved to the D700 it was not good enough over 200 mm at the edges, even at f11. The 80-200 is comparatively big and heavy, but the image quality is far better at f5.6 than the 70-300 is at f8 between 70 and 200. I'm afraid it is the old story, high quality glass and construction means more weight.
NIKON D3S + 24-120mm f/4 @ 120mm, ISO 1600, 1/125, f/5.6. Weight-wise, it is not a heavy lens when compared to the Nikon 28-300mm or 24-70mm lenses. Weighing about 670 grams, it is 230 grams lighter than the latter, which is a big difference. The lens feels very solid in hands and the zoom action is smooth and easy to rotate from 24 to 120mm
ORK3. 47 212 251 561 308 773 597 485
nikkor 70 200 f4 vs f2 8
