User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  1
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 41

Thread: Nikkor 70-200 2.8VR

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    19 Aug 2007
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Nikkor 70-200 2.8VR

    Hey all

    i'm getting the 2.8 VR, and im just wondering if anyone has had any troubles with theres?

    anything will be appreciated
    also mabybe the pro's and con's of it? *from owners perspective, not reviews*

    Thanks (:

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,831
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    its the best zoom ever made
    Darren
    Gear : Nikon Goodness
    Website : http://www.peakactionimages.com
    Please support Precious Hearts
    Constructive Critique of my images always appreciated

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    10 Oct 2007
    Location
    Canberra, Australia
    Posts
    10
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I second what kiwi said - it's absolutely sh*t hot.

    Only minor thing with it is that it is a bit heavy - but its worth lugging it around to get the photos that it gives you.
    Andy - TwoCollins Photography
    Nikon D300 | D40 | 70-200 2.8VR | 18-55 | 18-70 | 50 F1.8 | 70-300 | MB-D10 | SB-900 | SB-600
    Tokina 12-24 F4 | Tamron 90 F2.8 macro
    Please feel free to critique and comment on anything I post

  4. #4
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    19 Aug 2007
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    How heavy is it??

    would it be wise to use a monopod (i do alot of motorsports)

  5. #5
    A royal pain in the bum! arthurking83's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Jun 2006
    Location
    the worst house, in the best street
    Posts
    8,185
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi Aaron.
    You seem young, and with that I suppose reasonably fit.

    I reckon for prolonged use you may get tired, so a monopod can only help to assure a longer stretch of continuous use.

    All 70-200/2.8's are approx 1.3 to 1.5kgs give or take.
    I think there's a lighter weight Olympus(??) I remember reading about once, at less than 1kg, but the major players like Nikon/Canon/Sony/Tamron/Sigma... they all weight roughly the same. The minimal difference won't be noticeable.
    I have limited experience with the Sigma, although I do remember holding it a few times(thanks to Andrew(I@M) and it felt front heavy compared to my (then)80-200/2.8. The one thing I did like about that lens is that it felt very nicely balanced on my D70s and then D300... even though it was really only about 100-200grams lighter, or something like that??

    I was shooting one day recently some kite surfers, and I began by using my tripod(I don't have a monopd).. but once I started to shoot handheld, I think I lasted only about 5 to 10 mins, but my natural technique was to look for alternative angles and subjects anyhow.. so by naturally taking a (small 5-10 second)break anyhow to reassess the situation, or even if I really wanted to be there shooting at all. I stuck with it for about an hour..... just a fun thing to do, having stumbled upon these kite surfer guys. If you want to stick to your guns and do it professionally or just want to become immersed in the action, I think a tripod is a must anyhow. I didn't feel tired at all, and of course not having to get the shot(as in, no requirement to fulfill an obligation!) I could leave at any time anyhow.
    I didn't actually find the weight of the lens annoyingly heavy, and had I not been actually looking for something else to do, I would have stuck it out till sunset or as long as they were there to have fun.
    Using the tripod wasn't so restricting as I've been lead to believe(I use a ballhead with panning baseplate, but the tripod was only limiting because of it's height.
    if you decide to get any kind of support(and monopods are quite cheap in comparison to a decent tripod!) make sure it allows the viewfinder to come to eye level at the least... and maybe a little higher is better for the purpose of greater flexibility.

    You have an 18-70 kit lens.. stick something approximately 1kg over the lens or support some thing of approximately 1kg with your lens holding hand(I assume you use your left to 'cup' the lens to get an idea of how heavy it is.
    Something like a small packet/bag of rice is ideal as it will simply blend to the shape of the lens. That's what I did before I got my fast zoom(the 80-200/2.8) and I vaguely remember it felt about 'on par'.
    It stresses your lens holding hand, and you (should) naturally end up having your elbow placed against the side of your torso for extra balance and support, so you won't end up having to carry the extra weight using your arm muscles. That's where you'll get fatigued quickly if you try to carry the weight rather than brace your lens holding arm.

    Alternatively get heavily interested weightlifting
    Nikon D800E, D300, D70s
    {Nikon} -> 50/1.2 : 500/8(CPU'd) : 105/2.8VR Micro : 180/2.8ais : 105mm f/1.8ais : 24mm/2ais
    {Sigma}; ->10-20/4-5.6 : 50/1.4 : 12-24/4.5-5.6II : 150-600mm|S
    {Tamron}; -> 17-50/2.8 : 28-75/2.8 : 70-200/2.8 : 300/2.8 SP MF : 24-70/2.8VC


  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    29 Nov 2008
    Location
    River Murray
    Posts
    727
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    if you have a dx sensor then it is a superb lens for a zoom, size and heft aside. not so stellar on an fx camera, but still good.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,831
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Why Tom, mine is great on the D3, are you referring to the slight vignetting from time-to-time ?

  8. #8
    A royal pain in the bum! arthurking83's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Jun 2006
    Location
    the worst house, in the best street
    Posts
    8,185
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hey Darren, I think Tom is referring to it's soft corners(in FX) if you actually want sharp corner performance. It's very minimal and I think it really only affects the last 5% or so of the actual frame(from what I've seen) and DPR's graphical display confirms what every landscape photographer has seen in their image.
    Extreme corner performance is not up to par at the long end.. even down to f/16 or so, where diffraction then has an effect anyhow!

    For landscape work the 80-200AF-S @ 200mm is supposedly better, a lot better actually and we're only referring to the corners of the image @ 200mm.

    The Tammy 70-200 is also better too, and one of the reason it came up in my list of things to consider.

    Remember you and I have different requirements, where I really want great edge to edge IQ, you really only need the other 95% of the frame to be similarly great(for what you regularly do)

    I'd like to see some samples (if you have any or have the time to capture some) of a scene that needs critical across the frame image sharpness, as in a lot of landscapes. Or architectural shots or something.. but no shallow DOF shots.

    Been discussed on many Nikon forums over and again this issue of corner performance on FX. In 99.9% of shots of the main purpose of this lens, it makes no real difference.
    It's really just not the most appropriate lens for the landscaper, and not many landscapers use 200mm

    ps. I've actually been try to avoid that focal length, as my main focus at the moment seems to be roughly 10-100mm or 500mm .... but I'm still on DX so I don't have to worry about it for a while yet!

    I realise that the following point may be abstract and very limited to very few people, but consider this as a scenario.
    200mm is not all that uncommon for someone to create a multi image panorama, as with those gigapixel examples. The 70-200Vr would make that task most certainly impossible if you were careful enough to align the lens exactly at the frame edges for each shot. The corners would be unacceptably unsharp and the image will show it.
    You would have to allow overlap for each image,which is probably what most people do anyhow, but there's a difference between having that choice for yourself and having to allow for the lens's weakness.

  9. #9
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    27 Nov 2008
    Location
    Wunghnu Victoria
    Posts
    1,436
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Junior_B View Post
    i'm getting the 2.8 VR, and im just wondering if anyone has had any troubles with theres?
    The only trouble with mine is I'm now forced to spend on forture on good glass to match the IQ of this lens

    For motor sports a monopod is a good idea and you probably don't need a ballhead for that either. Also handles the Nikon 1.4 & 1.7 TC's pretty well if you need extra reach.

    Cheers
    Leigh
    Nikon D600, 24-70, 300 VR1 2.8, Tamron 60 f2 macro + Kenko tubes. SB800.



    My Nikonians Gallery

  10. #10
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    19 Aug 2007
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Talking

    Hi all

    thanks for your replies, i can't be bothered replying to each one so i'll just make ONE here hehe.

    i'm used to carrying weights around so 1 and a half kilo is no biggy for me. (:
    i'm bout 6"2' and the 2 monopods that i've tested i have to like bend down a bit cos nothing reaches my eye level >.>

    i think i would invest in a monopod first, just for the motorsports and stuff, then save up some extra cash for a tripod.

    also i was reading some reviews and i dont know if it will be on the 1.4x converter but on the 1.7 and 2.0 it had ghosting issues when fully zoomed in on the widest aperture?

    although the ghosting looks wicked, has anyone had any problems with that?

    Cheers,
    Aaron

  11. #11
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    27 Nov 2008
    Location
    Wunghnu Victoria
    Posts
    1,436
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Junior_B View Post

    i'm bout 6"2' and the 2 monopods that i've tested i have to like bend down a bit cos nothing reaches my eye level >.>
    I've got the Manfrotto 685B and it would be fine for you fully extended (remember the lense foot and body adds a good 6 inches to the height).

    also i was reading some reviews and i dont know if it will be on the 1.4x converter but on the 1.7 and 2.0 it had ghosting issues when fully zoomed in on the widest aperture?

    although the ghosting looks wicked, has anyone had any problems with that?

    Cheers,
    Aaron
    I use the 1.7 abd haven't noticed any ghosting issues, though I don't use it wide open either. More than likely it would be an issue with the 2x. Only ever heard good reports about the 1.4 TC.

    Cheers
    Leigh

  12. #12
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    19 Aug 2007
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ahh alright sweet thanks.

    the review said it most commonly found on the d70 (unsure if it was d70 or d70s)

    now im super excited to get the 70-200

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    29 Nov 2008
    Location
    River Murray
    Posts
    727
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I still think the lens is a valuable bit of glass, I still have mine. I guess there was alot of hype with this lens on dx and it couldn't quite live up to its own standards on the fx. But it is a zoom and we must accept some compromises.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    11 Jan 2008
    Location
    **Suburb/Town Required**
    Posts
    8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    i definately have no problem with this lense i love using for my surfing shots
    i donth think u can go wrong with this at all,but like early stated i too would use a monopod or tripod
    GEAR

    Nikon D80:AF-S 70-300 Nikkor , AF-S 18-70 Nikkor , AF 50mm Prime Nikkor , AF 85mm Prime Nikkor , Hoya Cir-Polarizing Filter , Hoya ND8 Filter
    Nikon Speedlight SB-600 External Flash

    "Patience is a virtue of necessity"


  15. #15
    jock
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by whipper_snappa View Post
    Hi all

    thanks for your replies, i can't be bothered replying to each one so i'll just make ONE here hehe.

    i'm used to carrying weights around so 1 and a half kilo is no biggy for me. (:
    i'm bout 6"2' and the 2 monopods that i've tested i have to like bend down a bit cos nothing reaches my eye level >.>

    i think i would invest in a monopod first, just for the motorsports and stuff, then save up some extra cash for a tripod.

    also i was reading some reviews and i dont know if it will be on the 1.4x converter but on the 1.7 and 2.0 it had ghosting issues when fully zoomed in on the widest aperture?

    although the ghosting looks wicked, has anyone had any problems with that?

    Cheers,
    Aaron
    Funnily enough - Ive seen a tall guy like you use an adjustable tent pole for a monopod - you get em from a camping store like rays outdoor - bout $40 + home made mod to accept camera - they work fine
    Last edited by jock; 07-09-2009 at 7:27pm.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    01 Oct 2007
    Location
    Manly, NSW
    Posts
    919
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've been using this lens, mainly for portrait and wildlife, for 5 years now : this is a superb glass.

    What I like :
    1- Extremely fast AF, as fast as my 600 VR, and accurate focus,
    2- Very good IQ at any f/stop and focal length,
    3- Good IQ with TC-17EII, Kenko 2x and stacked converters (TCx1.7+TCx2),
    4- Very good handling and well balanced with my D2 serie,
    5- Very good craftmanship.

    What I don't like much :
    1- Average IQ with TC-14EII (this TCx1.4 works extremely well with my 200-400 VR and 600 VR),
    2- Slow VR (for fast action shots, it's better to turn it off) and not very efficient,
    3- Average performances with back-lit subjects (I always use it without any filtre),

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    09 Oct 2009
    Location
    Semaphore Park
    Posts
    16
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm using my 70-200 on my D300 for sports and action stuff (because of the 1.5x conversion factor for reach) and on my D700 for portraiture and closer work. The vignetting can be controlled in camera and I've never had an issue with it on either body. The corner softness has not been an issue for me because I don't stitch panoramas (yet). The size and weight (after coming from Oly) can be an issue but it's construction makes up for it. The VR can be a bit slow. Lens flare can be an issue but is easily avoided. The bokeh is fantastic. It's weather-sealed too, so if you're doing outdoor motor sports (depending on which body you are using as everything from D300 upwards is environmentally sealed) and that could be a big advantage.

    I don't think you're going to have the reach you need with the 70-200 for motor sports without some sort of a converter. It's smaller and better designed than the 80-400 (which is known to pinch fingers if you're not careful when zooming).

    The 70-200 has this wonderful ability of getting tack sharp shots while having a lovely 'soft' effect in some photos. It's hard to explain, probably why it's great for portraits on the FX bodies.

    It is very expensive, but I think worth it. I've used a 2x Kenco TC on it and got lovely crisp shots even under very overcast conditions shooting dogs at agility. I always turn off the VR when doing action shots with it, no need to have it on if you're using high shutter speeds anyway, which would also eliminate the need for support if you don't have an issue with the weight.

    It balances nicely on both the D300 and D700.

    I'm very glad I bought mine and it's my main lens of choice.
    IngridM

    Nikon: D700, D300, Grip, 70-200VR, Nikkor 24-70, 14-24, 105VR, Nikkor 300/F4, SB900. For the kids: Olympus: E420 twin lens kit
    Adobe PSE 8, Capture One
    Wish list: Nikon 200-400, 1.7 TC
    http://ingridmatschke.smugmug.com

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    02 Jul 2008
    Location
    Launceston, TAS
    Posts
    335
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    IMO it has some of the best bokeh in the industry too.
    Adam.


    AGSPhotos.com

    Using Nikon & PS CS5.

  19. #19
    A. P's Culinary Indiscriminant mongo's Avatar
    Join Date
    21 Mar 2009
    Location
    Cronulla, Sydney
    Posts
    8,610
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    1.54 kgs to be accurate.
    Nikon and Pentax user



  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    18 Nov 2008
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    271
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    for some reason the bayonet mount isn't very tight on the d300, and other people on FM have noted it too

    the 17-55 fits nice and tight, no slack at all
    the 70-200 lens also fits quite snuggly on my d40x
    but there's a bit of play with the 70-200 + d300 combo

    also remember to switch camera and lens VR off when mounting/dismounting this lens
    strange things have been known to happen
    Thanks,
    Nam

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •