On 29 Oct 1998 04:42:40 GMT, wlac@cs.rmit.edu.au (Wai Lun Alan Chan) wrote:

>>>I would caution you that I do NOT like the new 80-200. My old one was WAY
>>>better. Odd, because I didn't think they changed the optical design of the
>>>lens. However, I've found that my new 80-200 sucks when wide-open at 200mm.
>>>Everything is soft, which I cannot tolerate. At 80mm wide-open, it is fine.
>
>Actually I obtained similar result with this zoom (the latest one with
>tripod collar) too. I shot it at 200mm f2.8 at infinity, and the whole
>picture was soft (very different from f4 up). And I am quite sure I
>did not make any mistake.

This is why I recommend lens checking upon purchase, and buying from
a place that will accept returns/exchanges. Zooms more than non-zooms
(and zooms that include wide-angle especially...) vary from sample
to sample, sometimes a LOT! (See my Nikkor lens evaluation list, on
my web page under "I babble" - I try to indicate the range of sample
variation I find with multiple samples of the same lens...) If I had
gotten the results you two have, the lens would have been returned,
since the point of paying-for/carrying big, fast lenses is to be able
to use them at those wide apertures with sharp results. Fast tele
zooms can be made that are sharp wide open - but I have yet to see a
shorter zoom that is fast and sharp wide-open, so I generally consider
those a waste of money compared with even faster (and much sharper at
wide stops) non-zooms in the same FL range...