For the opportunity to review the legendary Nikon ED AF Nikkor 80-200mm 1: 2.8D MKIII many thanks to Dmitry. Dmitry is engaged in the sale of excellent professional lenses, his catalog can be viewed here.
Nikon ED AF Nikkor 80-200mm 1: 2.8D MKIII review
TTX Nikon ED AF Nikkor 80-200mm 1: 2.8D (MKIII)
Focal length: 80-200mm, 2.5X zoom
Diaphragm: F / 2.8-f / 22
Number of aperture blades: 9 pieces
The weight: 1.3kg
Optical design: 16 elements in 11 groups, with 3 ED elements and DIH enlightenment
MDF: 1.5m (1: 5.9 magnification), the lens has a system CRC
Front Filter Diameter: 77 mm
Optically, the third version of the Nikon AF 80-200 / 2.8 lens is no different from the first two versions of MKI and MKII.
A complete and accurate list of all Nikkon Nikkor class 70(80)-(180)200/2.8 autofocus professional lenses:
- Nikon ED AF Nikkor 80-200mm 1: 2.8 (MKI) - November 1987 to September 1992, 16 elements in 11 groups (with 3 ED elements)
- Nikon ED AF Nikkor 80-200mm 1: 2.8D (MKII) - from September 1992 to 1997, 16 elements in 11 groups (with 3 ED elements)
- Nikon ED AF Nikkor 80-200mm 1: 2.8D (MKIII) - January 1997 to present, 16 elements in 11 groups (with 3 ED elements)
- Nikon ED AF-S Nikkor 80-200mm 1: 2.8D Silent Wave Motor (MKIV, AF-S) - from December 1998 to 2003, 18 elements in 14 groups (with 5 ED elements). There are two colors: black and gray.
- Nikon ED AF-S VR-Nikkor 70-200mm 1: 2.8G Vibration Reduction SWM IF (MKV, VRI) from February 2003 to January 2009, 21 elements in 15 groups (with 5 ED elements). There are two colors: black and gray.
- Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm 1: 2.8GII ED N VR Nano Crystal Coat SWM IF (MKVI, VRII) - July 2009 to present, 21 elements in 16 groups (with 7 ED elements).
- Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm 1: 2.8E FL ED N VR Nano Crystal Coat (MKVII, E) - from October 2016 to the present, 22 elements in 18 groups (6 ED, 1 FL, 1 HRI element). There is a rare subversion Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm 1: 2.8E FL ED N VR Nano Crystal Coat Nikon 100th Anniversary (100th Anniversary) - April 2017 to present, features a metallic gray finish with the Nikon 100th Anniversary logo).
- Nikon Nikkor Z 70-200mm 1: 2.8 VR S (MK VIII, Z, S-series) - from January 2020 to the present day. Nikon Z mirrorless version, 21 elements in 18 groups (6 ED, 2 ASP, 1 FL, 1 SR)
- Nikon Nikkor Z 70-180mm 1: 2.8 (MK IX,Z) - from June 2023 to the present day. Version for Nikon Z mirrorless cameras, 19 elements in 14 groups (5 ED, 3 ASP, 1 SUPER ED), diagram from Tamron 70-180mm F / 2.8 Di III VXD Model A056
Old versions Nikon ED 80-200mm f / 2.8D AF Nikkor MKII and MKI are basically different from the Nikon ED 80-200mm f / 2.8D AF Nikkor MKIII using the zoom method and type of enlightenment. The first two versions are often called 'single-ring', since one ring on the lens is responsible for zooming and focusing, and the zoom itself is performed using the piston method. The MKIII version is called 'two roundabout', since there are already two rings on the lens, the first is responsible for zooming, and the second for focusing, while the lens has a classic modern zoom method. All three versions of MKI, II, III have the same optical design, so the image quality of these lenses is quite similar to each other. There are even rumors that the first versions of MKI, MKII are even sharper after the third, I don't believe in that.
Optical design Nikon ED 80-200mm f / 2.8D AF Nikkor (MKIII)
An interesting point is that until now (at the beginning of 2013) only 2 versions of the lens of the 70 (80) -200 / 2.8 class are produced - this is a nanocrystalline Nikon ED 70-200mm f / 2.8GII AF-S VR N Nikkor (IF) and this old Nikon ED 80-200mm f / 2.8D AF Nikkor (MKIII). The MK3 version has been very, very successful.
Lens enlightenment Nikon ED AF review Nikkor 80-200mm 1: 2.8D MKIII and aperture view
Nikon AF 80-200mm f / 2.8D ED MKIII made in japanhave been producing the lens since 1996. The build quality is at a very high level, almost the entire lens barrel is made of metal alloy. The zoom and focus rings are rubberized. The lens itself is quite heavy for use on amateur cameras, as it weighs much more than the amateur camera itself. But the appearance of the lens is very 'serious'. The lens uses 'professional' 77 mm filters. On my Nikon D700 sits and looks very nice. Managing the lens is very convenient.
Focusing
Lens does not have internal focus. When focusing, the front lens rides and rotates freely in the lens barrel, but the trunk of the lens does not extendas the lenses are inside the frame. There will be no problems with using filters. Also, while zooming and focusing, the rear lens remains stationary, which reduces the 'vacuum cleaner' effect.
The lens has focus stop. The limiter can switch the lens to one of the modes Full / limit. In 'Full' mode, the lens can focus from infinity to 1.5m. In 'Limit' mode, the lens can focus either from infinity to 2.8m, or from 2.8m to 1.5m. Of course, the lens has a focus scale in meters and feet, as well as an infrared shift indicator for 80mm.
My shabby copy of Nikon 80-200 2.8 MK3
There is a switch on the lens focus mode 'M / A'. In M mode, only manual focus is available. The manual focus ring rotates on 90 degrees in 'Full' mode, and 60 degrees in 'Limit' mode. Manual focusing is quite easy and pleasant. In focus mode 'A', only auto focus is available and the focus ring remains locked. The focus mode switch has a lock button. This button is very inconvenient to use, and the switch itself, which is made in the form of a ring, is inconvenient enough to rotate to switch the focusing mode. The focus mode switch is the only thing I didn't like about this lens.
The autofocus of the lens is fast. When using the 'Limit' mode, little time is spent running the lenses from infinity to the limiting value. In the 'Full' mode, the lenses take much longer to run. Of course, due to the camera's screwdriver being used to focus, the lens emits quite loud noise with auto focus.
View of the Nikon ED AF Nikkor 80-200mm 1: 2.8D MKIII lens from the bayonet side
It's important: auto focus with this lens is available only when using him on cameras with built-in motor focusing.
Exact list Nikon DSLR cameras with a built-in focus motor, on which this lens will focus automatically:
- D1, D1h, D1x, D2x, D2xs, D2h, D2hs
- D3, D3x, D3s, D4, D4s, D5, D6
- Df
- D50, D70, D70s, D80, D90
- D7000, D7100, D7200,D7500
- D100, D200, D300, D300s,D500
- D600, D610, D750, D780
- D700, D800,D800E, D810, D810a, D850
- Fujifilm FinePix S1 Pro, S2 Pro, S3 ProS3 Pro UVIR, S5 ProIS Pro
- Kodak DCS PRO 14n, DCS Pro SLR/n
Exact list Nikon DSLR cameras without a built-in focus motor, on which this lens will not focus automatically:
Only auto focus and sound confirmation of focus will not work with these cameras, all other important functions, such as automatic exposure metering and automatic iris control, will work well.
You will find a lot of useful information on the types of cameras and lenses Nikon here.
Important: the lens has an aperture control ring. In order for the lens to start working normally on modern CZKs, you need to set the f / 22 value on the lens and snap a special switch near the aperture control ring. After such a manipulation, the aperture can be controlled from the camera, in more detail in the section on Non-G type lens.
The lens has tripod socket with foot. The socket cannot be removed. The socket foot can rotate around the lens and be fixed using a special clip.
Sample photos on Nikon AF 80-200mm f / 2.8D ED MKIII and full frame
All photo without processing. All photos in the gallery below were shot with a Nikon ED 80-200mm f / 2.8D AF Nikkor (MKIII) lens and camera Nikon D700, RAW, NL image management mode, converted to JPEG using VinewNX 2 with automatic detection BB (Calculate Automaticaly), reduced size to 3MP and imprinted data from EXIF.
Sample photos on Nikon AF 80-200mm f / 2.8D ED MKIII and cropped camera
All photo without processing. All photos in the gallery below were shot with a Nikon ED 80-200mm f / 2.8D AF Nikkor (MKIII) lens and camera Nikon D80, RAW, PO picture management mode, converted to JPEG using VinewNX 2 with automatic detection BB (Calculate Automaticaly), reduced size to 3MP and imprinted data from EXIF.
When using the lens on Nikon DX cameras EGF will be 120-300mm. Even on crop, this lens remains just a gorgeous tool in the hands of the photographer. The lens is well suited for portraiture, wedding photography, for wildlife photography, sports.
Personal experience
There are no significant complaints to the Nikon AF 80-200mm f / 2.8D ED MKIII, it is really a worthwhile lens, a good budget option to replace the expensive 70-200 / 2.8GII N VR. Many people write that the disadvantage of the lens is its weight, for me it is rather a virtue. Great weight helps take pictures with hand without grease. Of course, on F / 2.8 it’s not as sharp as a razor, but picture quality is really high. The lens may still use a lens hood HB-7, with a lens hood, the lens looks generally irresistible. Nikon 80-200 F2.8 MK3 can be considered one of the three lenses of a professional photographer, who should be in a case.
You can see the prices for the lens in popular stores. at this link, or in the price block below:
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.
Lens view Overview Nikon ED AF Nikkor 80-200mm 1: 2.8D MKIII on Nikon D80
Conclusions:
Nikon ED AF Nikkor 80-200mm 1: 2.8D (MKIII) - great professional lens. Good value for money. I recommend.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
Is it worth it to overpay for the 3rd version, if the 1st is 2 times cheaper?
Yes worth
Has anyone shot a bunch of Nikon D300 + 80-200 MK3?
Does it make sense to take this lens to a D300 carcass?
Or buy a cheaper option 70-300?
There are simply no fixes, there is a standard 18-55mm, but I want to get a good telephoto.
Such a lens makes sense to take to any carcass. 70-300 did not stand nearby in the picture.
And why do you need it?
To take portraits, well, children to shoot at sports competitions.
Here I look after the telephoto for these needs. New or used. budget 25-30 tr
For sports, a cheaper option will not work, it makes sense to take exactly 70 (80) -200 2.8
Guys and girls, help decide. There is a 600 device with 50 1.8. I want to take another lens in the region of 500 bu for shooting my daughter for 3 years. It seems like 85 1.8 is suitable, but on the nose and kindergarten and school, suddenly come closer, then I think maybe 80-200? Is it convenient to “hunt” for children with them, and with what better quality will this process be? Is there a big difference in nickname on picture quality at 80 2.8?
If we are talking about the Nikon camera, then the question is difficult. On the one hand, the 85 1,8 at an open aperture, the picture will be better, especially with the AF-S, the lens itself is light and small, a stop lighter, with a camera and this lens you can walk all day. On the other hand, the 80-200 has its own beautiful drawing, it is especially good for portraits, plus all the advantages of zoom, and the minuses are weight and size :). Look in the review of the MK2 version, there are many portraits, but optically MK2 and MK3 are the same. Better to have both lenses.
Thank you !, it’s clear that you need both, but it’s kind of expensive to have two lenses with the same focal length, it’s better to buy 28 mm for this money. But what does the optical image of MK2 and MK3 give the same?
I did not compare, I do not have MK3, only MK2. Arkady writes at the beginning of the article: “Optically, the third version of the Nikon AF 80-200 / 2.8 lens is no different from the first two versions MKI and MKII”.
In any case, it is better to take MkIII. The rest simply focus more slowly, they may not be in time for the jumping kids. If possible, of course.
85mm f / 1.8g is not suitable for indoor reporting. Tested on my own experience. It will slow down and smear all the time. If you need a bit, then only 85mm f / 1.8D.
Thank you all for the answers! I will probably take mk3. For a family I think will do. And marvelous portraits on it come out, at least that I saw on the net. )))
Many thanks for this site, too, without it I would not be able to navigate in a variety of photographic equipment))
the lens is excellent, at the moment my favorite,
But a rather tight stroke of the zoom ring, you have to turn it with some effort - the question is, is this typical for the model or is it a jamb of my copy? and if the matter is in the copy, then what could be the matter and how is it treated?
This is a jamb of an instance. There may be different reasons. For example, the deformation of a barrel after a fall.
If you are interested in repair, my tel. and Viber 0635432641
Does it make sense to take this for 22 tr or dig a little and take the AF-S VR Nikkor 70-200 f / 2.8G of the first generation?
Well, not a bit,) At the flea market, even he costs about 40. Only if with hands) Recently, they regularly appear on Pixel24.
I am not an expert, but in the picture there is not much difference from 80-200 at first glance.
Advantages in FR and the presence of a stub.
Examples, only without people https://sun9-52.userapi.com/c857620/v857620238/a52bb/4PM6idLceDU.jpg
https://sun9-10.userapi.com/c854020/v854020039/116cab/SDh-UzovKzw.jpg
https://sun9-26.userapi.com/c858224/v858224538/a3469/LWe3h4F8M2U.jpg
https://sun9-34.userapi.com/c855736/v855736591/1282d7/YfNTs3PVfyM.jpg
2.8 is not going anywhere. Kstai swan starred in those.
I would not “save”) I would be very happy to limit my time to 80-200, but I could not find it right away.
MK4 or MK3?
And can you put a lens hood on this lens as on 70-200?
HB-29 is called, if not mistaken.
Standard do not like.
Nikon D7000 Camera.
I have a choice between buying this (MKIII) and MKIV Silent Wave Motor
I plan to use it with the Nikon D800, so having a focus motor is not that important. But the difference in price (used) is about 300 euros. On the one hand, you can buy cheaper, but you want to buy a more recent model.
Which advise to take? In principle, 300 euros will not save the father of Russian democracy, so I don’t rest on the price.
Do not offer newer ones - the price is too high for my amateur tasks.
Mk4 seems to have the same engine as the 28-70 / 2.8 and 17-35 / 2.8. It is not particularly reliable.
For a long time I chose between versions 3 and 4 ... From the reviews I realized that it was better to take version 3, for 4 the motor does not work for a long time. And three days ago I bought this VESCH! Now I'm playing with her)
I wish you success and aesthetic pleasure :)))
I was personally convinced that this is an excellent zoom for its money, which will last more than one five years without failure. But it has a weak plastic ring for changing focus modes, and this must be taken into account.
I broke mine, and since the Chinese do not make spare parts, I had to contact a factory in Japan through a regional service center. I waited 2.5 months for them to send the necessary components, but it was worth it)
There was the same trouble, I bought it not expensive with a broken ring - AliExpress helped as always. The price of the repair came out 4k. http://ali.pub/55u8z9
The question is why Nikon did not make this ring from metal (aluminum) at least. Native is scary to twist flimsy. as an option I see to make from metal on CNC
I reread the thread ... it hangs. It seems like glass for a crop is suitable, according to the author. But someone scolds that it is no longer suitable for matrices of 20 and above - it "lathers" ... the D7500 carcass. For amateur photography, from travel to portraits and nature, will it go? Attracted by the aperture and used price. There is a negative experience with tamron 70-300 without a stub, did not take root, too dark and slow ... what can you tell me?
Optically like Tamron approximately. If Tamron didn't wash for you, then this one won't either.
This “someone” does not know how to focus, it will not wash anything if the focus is where it is needed.
Read the review, read the comments. I still don't understand, will this lens on the 7200 carcass behave decently or will it start to misbehave in terms of sharpness?
It has adjustable aperture, close to F / 5.6 and enjoy super sharp pictures.
Am I facing a choice of 80-200 2,8 MK3 or is it still the newer 70-200 2,8 G2? I plan to use it with Nikon d800. Landscape, portrait, little subject, sports unlikely. It is worth overpaying for the best picture or ease of use, or limit yourself to the old MK3
The focal lengths you specified (80-200 and 70-200) are suitable for shooting birds, the moon, and so on. For sports - perhaps, but there are also nuances. Suitable for a portrait, but a fixed focal length lens is better for it - 85 1,8G. The subject is also possible conditionally, but still, usually they shoot with macro lenses. But what they are completely unsuitable for is for landscapes. For landscapes, there is a lens with FR 14-24 2.8 (very expensive).
In general, the shooting plots you specified assume different lenses, with different FR (well, macro separately). There is no universal one for all cases.
I understand all this perfectly and the question was precisely in the choice of these two lenses. Is it really worth overpaying for the best frame quality? By the way, for a portrait 70 (80) -200 is quite applicable, in some cases I need it for a landscape. 85mm was out of the question
Personally, I have 70-300 4-5.6. It is of course "darker" than 2.8, but for me it is more interesting for its focus. Arkady has a review here.
Well, you understand the difference in price (by the way, G2 is a Tamron, Nikon's designation is G II), of course the latter will give a more detailed picture (especially on fr close to 200mm), and a stub is not superfluous. But the price there, if memory serves, is three times higher for sure. Yes, and you need to have plots where this difference will be obvious.
About landscapes on such focal points. For example, a focal length of 340 mm. Yes, of course, wide-angle lenses are 90% in landscape photography, but there are always exceptions to the rules. Sometimes 600mm may not be enough.
I also shot in the mountains at 80-200 mm. I was talking about typical FRs for landscapes.
Duck, of course, you can shoot landscapes on a TV set. And the girl, judging by the text, is quite adequate, and she chose a lens not only for landscapes, but also for a portrait, for which 14-24 is much less suitable than 80-200 for a landscape :) I hope she has already taken possession of a two-ring dashka and is doing great photo))
I wouldn't call 80-200 f / 2.8 MKIII an old man. It still has not lost its relevance and is being produced to this day. When it comes to choosing a lens, everything is simple. If you need it for work, then the more modern the better. Roughly speaking, of course.
If you are shooting for yourself, the MKIII is enough for you.
The latter, a double ring 80-200 af-d, has been discontinued since about 2014.
2Ivan: What about the landscape? His long-magician flatly refuses to shoot? She says “aha, here it means we have a landscape, she, I won’t take such pictures, in principle” :-)
There are many plots where 70+ is needed, and in the mountains they are generally more preferable. Well, of course, when you take this for a landscape, you have to imagine the range of focal points, not for every landscape it will fit, yes. As well as 14-24.
Just for the moon / birds, these telephoto lenses will do well, so-so, because for these objects, much longer lenses are desirable (if you don't shoot pigeons in the park, of course)
Excellent for sports.
For a portrait - it is also possible (not a fix, but also nothing)
The subject should be shot on a telephoto camera, and even from MDF of one and a half meters…. o_O Well, depending on what item, if can what bags for the catalog of women's accessories.
You can also shoot with pinhole.
A very strange comment with nothing unfounded sarcasm. Google it if you don't know what is usually used to shoot landscapes in the mountains.
This is not sarcasm, but an example of how you can shoot anything with a pinhole. Shooting in the mountains is a special case of landscape photography. Most likely, Olga meant completely different landscapes, with a wide viewing angle.
In general, she did not specify what she meant, but judging by the choice of technique, she should at least understand that landscapes at 80-200 will differ from landscapes shot at 14-24.
And yes, landscapes are filmed on TV not only in the mountains.
Of course I understand the difference between a landscape of 14 and 200 mm 😂. I just don't have the opportunity to test these lenses, so I'm asking here. In addition, I am currently considering Tamron 70-200 2,8.
If you tested two Nikonovsky and one Tamronovsky lens, do you think you would see a significant difference in the pictures? In skillful hands, you can get a picture from the standard "dark" zoom, as if it were shot with a high-aperture fix.
My hands are skillful, do not hesitate. If you can't say anything about the case, maybe it's not worth writing ?!
I didn't mean to offend you. I just wanted to emphasize that many people believe that by replacing the camera (lens), the photos will change by an order of magnitude in quality.
This is not "many people think", it is true when it comes to the lens. In the same hands, photos * in quality * will change exactly if you switch from a dark budget zoom to a light top zoom or fixed.
Does he also spin the background like mk2 ???
Hello! Arkady, thank you for your titanic work! Very informative, understandable material and easy navigation! For me as a beginner, just a godsend!
I wanted to ask experts and owners for advice on choosing between 30-700 and 80-200, read the review and comments, the 80-200 lit up, but I was alarmed by the comments that not very good compatibility with the 24MP matrix, I suppose to use it on 7200. I plan to shoot birds , nature.
Works in conjunction with the D780, I don't see any problems with its 24MP matrix
For birds and nature, I would take 30-70…. ugh, 70-300, of course.
80-200 IMHO has several other tasks.
Victor, thank you very much for your answer! I will think further. Birds are not my main task. Yes, and for photos of birds with great enthusiasm, I think you need a longer lens. The main question is whether the 80-200 will work correctly at 7200 ?! I really fell for the description of the picture that 80-200 draws.
Will
Lather will also be. Didn't look at the comment above
Definitely for birds 70-300 VR
I shot them a lot of birds
by the link - an album in which ALL shots were shot exactly 70-300
https://flic.kr/s/aHsjXhinar
Hello. The question is. I have a Nikkor 85 1.4d lens and a Tamron 24-70 2.8 g2 lens. There is not enough blur on 85 .. is there any point in selling 85 and buying 80-200 3 versions?
Blur in the editor, business. Many people shoot and wash the background at 35 mm. And the quality of the fix pictures is still higher. It depends on what you are shooting for ...
85mm, as for me, is the coolest and most versatile lens, if not too lazy to run with your feet. I only have a zoom for animals and dynamic scenes. My dream is to buy 85 1.4. Blurring on a 180 or 200 telephoto lens will certainly be stronger ... Although the diaphragm is open and so everything is soapy, so what may be "missing" there - I can't even put my mind to it, sewed on soap, everything is IMHO. But I am not in the subject of your specific problem. I don’t presume to judge.
And why sell a good lens?)
There is definitely no point in selling 85 1.4d. It is small, four times lighter than 80-200 (excerpts), but 180..200 will also have to hide behind, so the win is dubious, in fact.
On Nikon z5, will autofocus work or look towards the fourth version?
Will not. AF mark stands for motor-driven autofocus from the camera. The FTZ adapter does not support focusing such lenses for Z cameras. 4th version - AF-S, that is, it has a built-in motor in the lens, it is compatible with Z-cameras.
Guys, what kind of model? Like MK3, but it's not clear what additional markup is?
02
03
003
This man bought himself a set of rubber bands and installed them over the rings. If you remove them, you will still have the same MK3.
Thanks Arkady, I didn't think of something :)
This lens, like all old professional lenses I've found, have one hidden property. Here is my story - I am not engaged in commercial photography, but I am often invited by various friends or organizations to take pictures for them. I do not take money for this, but on the other hand, I have the opportunity to travel to various places, it is not so easy to do it alone, often even impossible. So at times they ask me to take pictures of a certain type, for example, with a good blur of the background, so a few days ago I told one such friend that I would take them if I had a special lens for this, and after they they asked me about the price of the lens, I named the price of this particular lens, since such a zoom simply cannot be found cheaper, and its reputation was excellent. And 310 dollars (at least here) is the money that is not considered particularly large and unbearable. If I had to name the price for the Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR II at $ 1000, no one would have thought to just buy it and give it to me, but this lens was immediately, instantly bought and presented, hoping to shoot with them 5-6 times, then even from a commercial point of view, it turned out super beneficial for them, about $ 40 per session. Here is a not particularly obvious advantage of old professional lenses - sometimes you can get them just in exchange for a few photo shoots, even without having to ask yourself to buy it for such shoots. Weight is a secret in their price, that is, in such a price, which, well, does not bite very much. The seller sent the lens itself in condition 99, that is, completely new, in the original box, without a single scratch or the like. After the first tests, my subjective opinion is that, except for the drop in resolution to 200mm F2.8, everything else is just fine. Compared to the AF 70-210 / 4 (which I have been using for a long time) - like heaven and earth (although there are disadvantages - weight and a large MDF), in terms of autofocus, everything is fine, at least on my D3s. In short, if you close the aperture to F3,3, then you can shoot everything at all focal lengths, if you need an aperture of F2.8, then you need to limit yourself to 150-170mm, that is, do not screw it up a bit to 200mm.
Of course, many thanks to Arkady for this review, as well as to everyone who wrote reviews, thanks to them I chose this lens.
Friends, can anyone tell me? I tested several copies on my D610 soap soap. But MK4 behaves much better, but there the optical design is different. Modet Arkady will tell you, is this a problem with a resolution of 24 mp and higher, or maybe a problem with a specific instance? I consider glass as a portrait with an artistic drawing. Thank you in advance)))
apparently with af problems, mk3 24 mp easily pulls
Here is the catch - 85mm 1/8 - everything is fine, sigma art 14-24 - no problem, sigma art 24-105 - no problem. So I'm trying to find a good copy. At the same time, 80-200 mk4 and 70-200 vr1 also did not notice any problems.
Arkaliy, I’m still very interested in sigma art 50-100 which is under crop, but use it on FF. Will you have a review of it? Have you tried to remove the crop glass vignette on FF and is it real?
Thank you very much for your work)))
50-100 only at 100mm in full frame, I can’t finish the review.
If 80-200 does not start, take something else, there are a lot of options.
Sigma 50-100 I don’t see the point, you will forever suffer with this vignette.
Yes, I’m waiting for the receipt in the store to do a couple of tests))) the sigma has a “cinematic” picture, and this is one of the criteria, of course, but I’ll wait for the review))) the vignette is not corrected in the editors? And then in skti vrodk they wrote that something could be done with it ...
there is a vignette and there are black edges
Yes, and modern high-aperture portrait theoeviks 1/8 class 50 (70) -100 (150) at full frame, alas, no (((so you have to reinvent the wheel))
and what's the point of 50-100 at full frame, if you can take 85 1.4?
I can’t believe that 15 mm can change something a lot. The same 105/2 and 135/2 solve these problems with interest, although they have their own problems. And you can strain and take 105 1.4 art or native 105 1.4.
The point is versatility. I shoot portraits at 85, 105 and 135. It's expensive to have three fixes, of course. I repeat, I love Sigma for my cinematography, as well as 80-200 for watercolor))) But these are different glasses in my opinion, and for different tasks. For fashion and journalism, by the nature of the picture, I prefer sigma, and for portraits at certain times of the year (autumn) and certain colors (crimson foliage, trees, contrasting clothes) 80-200))). And Nikon is better for studio portraits. But this is in my opinion)) 105 and 135 defocus are no longer found in St. Petersburg (((
Thank you very much, Arkady, for the conversation. I hope not too tired))) It will be interesting to discuss other topics later. What, in your opinion, are interesting glass options for a full frame as a zoom assistant? I read all your reviews, maybe there is something that has not been mentioned yet? Your opinion will be interesting.