On 28 Oct 1998 04:42:07 GMT, p645@aol.com (P645) wrote:

>I'm sure this question must have come up before, but I'm about to buy
>a lens to use primatily for outdoor portraits. I understand the 180s
>performance is legendary, but the zoom seems more practical. I am
>somewhat picky about contrast, but sharpness isn't as important in
>a portait lens. My question is, how does the zoom compare to the
>180 in that regard ? I'd appreciate hearing from people who own
>or have used both extensively.

At infinity-focus, they are VERY close in performance, even wide-open.
As the focus moves toward 5' or so at 180-200mm, the 180 will look
better at the widest stops. The weight/size/awkwardness handling
difference is noticeable. I kept my 80-200 f2.8 and sold my 180
(twice!), due to the requirements of the type of work I do,
but a friend made the reverse decision, as you may, too, for your
work. In general, unless you have a specific need for a zoom, a
non-zoom may be better, being generally lighter/smaller/cheaper/
faster/sharper/easier-to-focus/easier-to-use/etc...;-) (You can
probably tell I don't favor zooms much, though the Nikkor 80-200mm
f2.8 is one of the very best, and I do use that one...)