Please help me decide...

[PhotoMad]

I have the option of purchasing either of these: (pricing is only $ 300 difference so that is not affecting my decision.)
Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED VR AF Zoom Lens.
Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Zoom Lens.

Usage will vary from event coverage/ wildlife/ fashion & runway etc.
Realy looking for which will be the most versatile lens in a variety of conditions. I do like the 2.8 on the 70-200mm, but then I am swayed by the 80-400mm flexibility but that only has f4.5 best.
But then with VR is should have 2-3 stops of shutter speed to allow better use of the available light at events. i.e. shoot at +-200th rather that 320th handheld.

I am so used to having 300mm on call, I am scared the 200mm is going to leave me short.

Current carry lens is a really versatile Sigma 28-300 f3.5-6.3, but the 6.3 at 300mm low light is a bit of a pain.

[Neil V]

Well, what do you want to do mostly with the lens, wildlife/birding or sports etc?

[badpickev]

70-200 is a great lens will work well in all applications but will come up short in the wildlife arena. a 1.4 will not become to much of a compromise.

the 80-400 mightr be slow and bulky for events and all but wildlife.

[Narsuitus]

My vote is for the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Zoom Lens because I would need the faster lens more than the longer reach.

[SamppaM]

The decision is indeed difficult. Especially since the lenses are designed for different purposes! 70-200/2.8 is a great lens for action protography. The large aperture and the VR enable photographing without a flash in very low lightning. However, its focal length is not enough for wildlife. Experience has proved that 300mm is the minimum in wildlife photographing. 80-400/4.5-5.6 is a good lens for wildlife photographing, because the VR gives 2-3 f-stops in low lightning. Zoom enables excellent compositions.

[Marc Kurth]

I agree with Sami's comment about focal length for wildlife. The 70-200 is very well known for it's speed, handling and sharpness - but it's still only 280mm with the 1.4 which is too short for wildlife and other "long distance" requirements.

Of the two, the 70-200 will generally provide more versatility as a general purpose telephoto zoom.

[Jeff Perry]

Just a few other thoughts regarding the size of the lenses. In comparison to your Sigma 28-300, the two Nikkor lenses are mammoth in proportion. The 70-200 VR is actually longer than the 80-400 (when set at 80) but the 80-400 really stretches when zoomed out. the 70-200 does not change in length thru the entire zoom range. Also, as you might expect, both lenses are very heavy, again in comparison to the compact design of the Sigma 28-300.

The f2.8 speed of the 70-200 may be essential to you in combination with the VR in low light conditions without flash (fashion/runway work) but I suspect you would be using a speedlight and then the f2.8 becomes less important accept for the shallower DOF that you might be interested in.

I use both lenses, and like the 80-400 for outdoor action sports work, e.g., soccer, drag racing, etc. As stated previously, it is also the weapon of choice when it comes to shooting wildlife from an undisturbing distance.

Overall the VR lenses from Nikon are great, and do work as advertised. Just remeber that all that glass comes at a price, both in cost and weight.

Jeff

[dbphotos]

I would definitely go with the 70-200 VR lens. You'll find that you will use it more often and if you want to do runway stuff you'll want the f/2.8. Also, you can always add a teleconverter and get the close to the same distance on that lens and only give up 1 stop so you'll have a longer lens with a better f stop.

Just my .02cents.

[Gregg]

I'd go for the 70-200VR and add a TC later. There is nothing worse than a slow focusing lens and the 70-200 is awesoem. And, on the Runway you are going to want the 2.8 for sure.