Nikon 80-200 ED 2.8

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by Dave Man, Sep 24, 2003.

  1. Dave Man

    Dave Man Guest

    I just picked one up on ebay...but there were no directions included..my
    question is can I remove the tripod mount? I think it will look stupid to
    handhold that lens with it still attached...also any idea where I can get a
    set of directions?

    Thank in advance...
     
    Dave Man, Sep 24, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Dave Man

    Matt Clara Guest

    I'm going to assume you don't know much about 35mm slr gear, let alone
    photography. My only other option is to rip you for a troll or an idiot.

    Leave the tripod mount on. Get a tripod, use the tripod mount. Make
    enlargements from your images. Pursue excellence. Keep coming here for
    advice.

    It isn't about how you look, it's about the images you make. If you can't
    see that, buy Sigma, 'cause it's a lot cheaper, and good enough for your
    purposes.
     
    Matt Clara, Sep 24, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Dave Man

    Generic Eric Guest

    I'm sure he'll keep coming here for advice after being ridiculed by a
    complete tool like yourself.
     
    Generic Eric, Sep 24, 2003
    #3
  4. Dave Man

    McLeod Guest

    Actually, I found the tripod mount on the 80-200 quite awkward as well.
    There are lots of instances where a tripod is out of the question and the
    mount seems to always be in the way of your left hand if you have it
    tightened up, and it puts pressure on your fingers if you leave it loose and
    let it rotate. I didn't look into whether it came off because the lens
    wasn't mine, but I understand what he's talking about. A valid question.
     
    McLeod, Sep 24, 2003
    #4
  5. Dave Man

    Dave Man Guest

    geeezzz.....rough crowd.....no kidding a tripod is always better but if I
    can't or don't want to use one I have an option, this is still the USA you
    know......and for those who defended me thank you....
     
    Dave Man, Sep 24, 2003
    #5
  6. Dave Man

    Matt Clara Guest

    Now what you say is valid--"I think I look stupid" is not. I have the
    80-200 and the tripod mount is always there, though when hand holding you
    can rotate it at least a little out of the way. I usually don't bother, as
    it doesn't bother me.
     
    Matt Clara, Sep 24, 2003
    #6
  7. Dave Man

    Matt Clara Guest

    My apologies Dave, I was in a poor mood last night and took some aggression
    out on you. I do find your concern frivolous, but that doesn't mean it is
    for you. On my version of this lens, there is no way to get the mount off
    that I know of. It's very tightly integrated in the housing of the lens
    itself and I feel one would compromise the integrity of the lens by allowing
    dust and moisture in to its interior. Perhaps on older versions this would
    not be the case.
    At any rate, it's an excellent lens. I hand held it all over Yellowstone
    this summer past and not one person said I looked stupid with the lens mount
    on it. Who knows though, they may have been thinking it!
    Again, apologies.
    mc
     
    Matt Clara, Sep 24, 2003
    #7
  8. Not here. Why not write to Nikon? The collar comes off, I believe.
     
    Michael Scarpitti, Sep 24, 2003
    #8
  9. Dave Man

    [BnH] Guest

    Why don't you get the non Tripod collar version ?
    Same lens construction and much cheaper.

    =bob=
     
    [BnH], Sep 24, 2003
    #9
  10. Dave Man

    Matt Clara Guest

    You know what they say, ask a ridiculous question . . .
    Besides, I've already apologized, so I can't be a _complete_ tool!
     
    Matt Clara, Sep 24, 2003
    #10
  11. Dave Man

    Alan Browne Guest


    MEEEEEEOOOOOWWWWW!
     
    Alan Browne, Sep 24, 2003
    #11
  12. Dave Man

    Gregg Guest

    Directions ?

    Yes, you can remove the tripod mount if you must. Of course it's much
    better to leave it on and use a tripod or at least a monopod (my preference
    for this lens). But, no problem to shoot hand held with it (at least at the
    short end) if you can adequately brace yourself, after all, I assuming
    that's one of the reasons you paid the big bucks for the fast f/2.8
     
    Gregg, Sep 25, 2003
    #12
  13. Dave Man

    Dave Man Guest

    ok..so how do I remove it??


     
    Dave Man, Sep 25, 2003
    #13
  14. I think you're confusing the older fixed mount lens with the newer AF-S
    version. There are two different Nikkor AF 80-200's with tripod mounts. The
    older version was simply an update to the original 80-200 push-pull zoom
    that came out in the late 80's. While a superb lens, that version had no
    mount and was very heavy. Many of us complained it couldn't be used on a
    tripod without causing camera shake. Outfits like Kirk & a weird German
    outfit called Ni-Cam made brackets for those lenses that did the job. Nikon
    a few years later responded by creating an updated 2 touch version of the
    lens in a new shell with a fixed tripod mount. Both of these lenses used the
    Nikon body-driven focusing system, which for some was too slow. In response,
    Nikon released the AF-S version in '99, with an internal motor and removable
    tripod mount. Although it focuses more quickly than the older lenses, that
    lens is in my judgment inferior optically to the older ones, plus the tripod
    mount is sloppy and inadequate to eliminate shake with slow shutter speeds
    when mounted on a tripod. Kirk is now making a replacement tripod mount for
    it that may help. It's also bulky, heavy and difficult to transport compared
    to the older lens. However, it provided a better competitor to Canon. I
    traded off my older lenses to get one of these and wish I hadn't.
     
    Gerald G. McGeorge, Sep 25, 2003
    #14
  15. Dave Man

    EDGY01 Guest

    << I just picked one up on ebay...but there were no directions included..my
    question is can I remove the tripod mount? >><BR><BR>


    Actually, there are SEVERAL AF versions of this lens. I'm assuming that you
    don't have the AF-S version because it's intuitively obvious to the casual
    observer in how to remove that tripod mount. For the version one before the
    AF-S version it is a royal pain to remove it and I suggest that you not. Give
    me a serial number and then i'll have an idea of which lens you truly have and
    we can go from there.

    Dan Lindsay
    Santa Barbara

    P.S. There are no stupid questions. But, as you have found, there are many
    who stupidly try to put down the asking of questions...
     
    EDGY01, Sep 25, 2003
    #15
  16. Dave Man

    Dave Man Guest

    it is a AF-D......not the IF with the silent wave AF drive...
     
    Dave Man, Sep 25, 2003
    #16
  17. The previous "D" version does have the same optical construction, but
    it's a one-touch (push-pull) design. That's not everyone's cup of
    tea, and it isn't quite as fast on autofocus.

    That being said, I went with the push-pull version myself. It spends
    a good chunk of time attached to a Manfrotto 3420. While that's more
    awkward than a built-in tripod mount, it's more stable than _any_
    built-in I've seen in this class of lens.
     
    Michael Benveniste, Sep 25, 2003
    #17
  18. Dave Man

    Wes J Guest

    Are you calling Matt a Swiss army knife?
     
    Wes J, Sep 27, 2003
    #18
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.