User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  15
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 26

Thread: Nikon 70-200 f2.8

  1. #1
    Member ksolomon's Avatar
    Join Date
    30 Mar 2011
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    365
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Nikon 70-200 f2.8

    Hi all sorry been MIA for a few days, eyes and contacts been playing up and have not been able to say on a computer for more than 10 minutes, let alone take photos.

    I have been offered a 70-200 f2.8 lens 18 months old for just less than 1/2 retail price from a good source and wanting opinions please.

    I know this is a great lens and used widely in the portrait arena. Do the people that have this lens use alot of the time or only for special shoots.

    Any comments and opinions appreciated
    Kassy
    Nikon D700
    CC Welcome and Appreciated

  2. #2
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    27 May 2009
    Location
    Northern Beaches - Sydney
    Posts
    774
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    From all reports this is a fabulous lens (I don't have one )

    The one you have been offered is probably the VR1 version? I have heard it is excellent on DX bodies, and very good on FX, but the VR11 version may be a bit better on FX.
    David

    Nikon D810
    Nikkor AF-S 24-120VR, Nikkor AF-S 16-35VR, Nikkor AF-S 70-300VR, Nikkor AF 50 f1.8
    Tamron 90mm Macro

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    09 Feb 2009
    Location
    Newcastle, NSW
    Posts
    8,372
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I`ll take it if you don`t want it for that price...
    Graeme
    "May the good Lord look down and smile upon your face"......Norman Gunston___________________________________________________
    Nikon: D7000, D80, 12-24 f4, 17-55 f2.8, 18-135, 70-300VR, 35f2, SB 400, SB 600, TC-201 2x converter. Tamron: 90 macro 2.8 Kenko ext. tubes. Photoshop CS2.


  4. #4
    Member
    Threadstarter
    ksolomon's Avatar
    Join Date
    30 Mar 2011
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    365
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by davidd View Post
    From all reports this is a fabulous lens (I don't have one )

    The one you have been offered is probably the VR1 version? I have heard it is excellent on DX bodies, and very good on FX, but the VR11 version may be a bit better on FX.
    David, thanks for that, didn't think about it. Just confirmed it is the VR1 version. Does that make much difference will be using on a FX body

  5. #5
    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)
    what is 1/2 price ???? Mongo bought the VRI of this brand new over a year ago from a camera shop with full nikon new gear factory warranty for $2000 ( at the time, second hand copies were selling for around $1800).

    Yes, it is a beautiful lens - Kiwi salivates over how good this lens is. MOngo must agree it is great optically, AF is quick and accurate, nice to handle (just a little big and weighty), handles the latest converters really well. Now , having said all of that, Mongo has only used it about 4 times since March, 2010. This fact may be more about the other choices Mongo has to play with and the type of photography he is into over that period. It has been mainly bird photography which means he has had a preference for 300m and 400mm lenses instead.

    the 70-200 f2.8VR is as good a zoom in that range as money can buy !

    PS the VRI has 5 ED elements and is primarily for DX use but can be used in FX. The VRII has 7 ED elements and is designed to perform slightly better in the corners on FX. MOngo has not tried both but suspects the difference is negligible.
    Last edited by mongo; 18-07-2011 at 8:43pm.
    Nikon and Pentax user



  6. #6
    Member
    Threadstarter
    ksolomon's Avatar
    Join Date
    30 Mar 2011
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    365
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Mongo, when I started this thread, silly me was thinking it was the VRII lens and said just under 1/2 price based on that lens is $3,000 retail.

    Now I see the lens is VRI. I still think the price is reasonable looking at Bay, I would be using on a D700 and looking at the pros and cons now of this or continue to save for the VRII.

    All food for thought - Thank you

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,831
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have version 1 and I use it all the time. Would be my often used portrait, candid, wedding lens on fx and dx. I actually like the focal length better on fx for this sort of thing.

    I don't just use it on a special occasion but every time I use it, it becomes a special occasion.
    Darren
    Gear : Nikon Goodness
    Website : http://www.peakactionimages.com
    Please support Precious Hearts
    Constructive Critique of my images always appreciated

  8. #8
    Member
    Threadstarter
    ksolomon's Avatar
    Join Date
    30 Mar 2011
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    365
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by kiwi View Post
    I don't just use it on a special occasion but every time I use it, it becomes a special occasion.
    Awesome quote, thanks Darren

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    26 May 2008
    Location
    Launceston
    Posts
    2,012
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Depending upon your $$$ situation, in light of you having a D700, the vr 2 performs exceptionally well, afs fast and accurate, renders images beautifully, plus the improved VR is significantly better, imo.
    Having said that, if you went for the vr1, you would not be disappointed as it is a beautiful lens in its own right. I use the vr2 lens 90% of the time I shoot people/ animals outdoors, but as with any lens recommendation, it is dependent on what your needs are....and also if you are willing to lug around the weight. are you able to test the lens to help you decide?
    Cheers, Lani.
    Bodies: Nikon D700, D300 Primes: Nikon 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.4G, 105mm VR 2.8, 300mm f4. Zooms: Nikon 14-24 2.8, 24-70 2.8, 70-200VR II 2.8, Sigma 10-20mm Processing: Photoshop CS5 extended, LR 3.2.


  10. #10
    Member
    Threadstarter
    ksolomon's Avatar
    Join Date
    30 Mar 2011
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    365
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Lani View Post
    Depending upon your $$$ situation, in light of you having a D700, the vr 2 performs exceptionally well, afs fast and accurate, renders images beautifully, plus the improved VR is significantly better, imo.
    Having said that, if you went for the vr1, you would not be disappointed as it is a beautiful lens in its own right. I use the vr2 lens 90% of the time I shoot people/ animals outdoors, but as with any lens recommendation, it is dependent on what your needs are....and also if you are willing to lug around the weight. are you able to test the lens to help you decide?
    Thanks for your opinion Lani, I am going to ask tomorrow if I can test for a day before making any firm commitment. $$ situation is tight and would take a reasonable time to save for the VRII but if it is going to be a lens I would not use enough I would be prepared to wait

  11. #11
    Ausphotography Regular K10D's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Sep 2010
    Location
    Baldivis, 6171
    Posts
    560
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I use the VR1 on a D7000. I bought it for my D700 and soft corners don't matter as I tend to shoot wide open. I only bought the D7000 for this lens as it shoots through the sweet spot and I use the D700 on the 14-24 and 24-70 Nikkors. Get the VR1 and try it on your D7000, its a killer combo with higher resolution than the D700. My D7000 is permanently attached to the VR1.

    Best regards

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    26 May 2008
    Location
    Launceston
    Posts
    2,012
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    In that case, I wouldn't wait....if you decide you would use it, you are better to have the vr1 and be shooting with it.

  13. #13
    Member
    Threadstarter
    ksolomon's Avatar
    Join Date
    30 Mar 2011
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    365
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks K10D and Lani for your help and advice.

    Will keep all posted and hopefully get a test this weekend

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,831
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    What lani is trying to say is that a vr1 in the hand is better than vr2 in the bush
    Last edited by kiwi; 18-07-2011 at 9:36pm.

  15. #15
    Member Tommo1965's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Oct 2010
    Location
    Perth Hills Mundaring
    Posts
    1,028
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    i did quite a bit of testing a VRI against the VRII..as I could have bought the VRI for $1800{ used}..against a VRII that was $3100.

    as the 200MM FL is a little short for what I wanted, I knew that Id always be pushing the lens to the limit {cropping}..and the VRII IMHO is quite a bit sharper than the VRI in that situation..as I had a store credit..I plumbed for the VRII...VRII can be had for around $2400 now..still quite a bit more than a VRI at $1500

    heres a Mark two at 100%



    Mark One at 100%


  16. #16
    Who let the rabble in? Lance B's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Aug 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    8,054
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If it is the VRII version of the 70-200 f2.98, then it is a superb lens and a great deal and I have some of the best lenses that Nikon has to offer as seen in my signature.

    I use this lens for portraiture and for animal shoots and it's sharpness blows me away every time I use it. Better than most primes!

    See the tests:

    http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/511...fs7020028vr2ff

    http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...ct/1280/cat/13

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,831
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I personally dont think the premium over the series 1 that the series 2 demands is good value, you could buy a lot of other stuff with that $$$
    Last edited by kiwi; 18-07-2011 at 10:19pm.

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    13 Jul 2011
    Location
    Yokosuka
    Posts
    87
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by mongo View Post
    *Edit*
    Yes, it is a beautiful lens - Kiwi salivates over how good this lens is. MOngo must agree it is great optically, AF is quick and accurate, nice to handle (just a little big and weighty), handles the latest converters really well. Now , having said all of that, Mongo has only used it about 4 times since March, 2010. This fact may be more about the other choices Mongo has to play with and the type of photography he is into over that period. It has been mainly bird photography which means he has had a preference for 300m and 400mm lenses instead.

    the 70-200 f2.8VR is as good a zoom in that range as money can buy !

    PS the VRI has 5 ED elements and is primarily for DX use but can be used in FX. The VRII has 7 ED elements and is designed to perform slightly better in the corners on FX. MOngo has not tried both but suspects the difference is negligible.
    I would echo what Mongo have mentioned. I had the VRI before and upgraded it to the VRII since I used it primarily on my D700. The VRII is just way sharper and I had to stop the VRI lens down to f5.6 just to have sharper images on all corners when used with a FX camera. The performance of the VRI is indeed much better when paired with your D7000 DX camera body. However, the added Nano coating of the Nikon 70-200mm VRII just makes this lens more enjoyable since it resist flare very well. It has less vignetting when used with a FX camera compared to the VRI. I found that out when I used it to shoot an outdoor concert and the spot lights were pointing directly at me. If you look at the prices now, it will be indeed a deterrent and it will make you wonder if the price difference is really worth it? If you are going to use it primarily on FX, then I would say yes. No if you are going to use it on DX. Do I use it all the time, probably not because I do have plenty of lenses to choose from but like what others have mentioned, it is a always a special occasion whenever you lug this lens outdoor. I purchased my lens before the earthquake here in Japan so it was a lot cheaper then and Nikon even had a $400 USD instant rebate if you buy one of their DSLRs. The only other thing that I don't like aside from it's steep price is it's focus breathing but I augment that by using a TC if I want a longer reach.

    A light weight version would be the the Nikon 85mm f1.4G for portrait or if you are on a budget get the Sigma 85mm f1.4 HSM instead which really works well for me. Physically, the VRI has a red "VR" letters and the VRII version has gold VR letters. Here are some random shots using the newer Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VRII.


    Bowlingforsoup lead singer by gqtuazon, on Flickr


    D7K70-200mmVRII_16 by gqtuazon, on Flickr


    D7k 70-200mmVRII by gqtuazon, on Flickr

    When shooting with both cameras, I use the 24-70 with the D700 and 70-200mm VRII with the D7000. I hope you are up for the extra weight if you decide to do this plus the speed lights.


    D7000 grip+Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VRII by gqtuazon, on Flickr
    Best regards,

    Glenn
    My flickr
    My Gear

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    18 Nov 2008
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    271
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    i have the VR and use it whenever i shoot outdoors

    it usually sits on the D300, but i actually really like the focal length and working distances on full frame
    feels much more flexible, whereas the D300 always feels too long

    i shoot people, animals, cars, bikes, sports, so vignetting and less sharpness in corners has never bothered me
    VRII would be nice, but the premium over the VR is not worth it for me

    the VR function works ok and is nice to have, but i do not use it all the time
    the AF is damn good though... very fast and precise

    compared to my old AF-D 80-200, this lens is on another level
    it really is a joy to use

    when buying the second hand lens, don't forget to do all your usual checks and tests
    this is a pro lens so it may have had a hard working life
    Thanks,
    Nam

  20. #20
    Member
    Threadstarter
    ksolomon's Avatar
    Join Date
    30 Mar 2011
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    365
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by gqtuazon View Post
    I would echo what Mongo have mentioned. I had the VRI before and upgraded it to the VRII since I used it primarily on my D700. The VRII is just way sharper and I had to stop the VRI lens down to f5.6 just to have sharper images on all corners when used with a FX camera. The performance of the VRI is indeed much better when paired with your D7000 DX camera body. However, the added Nano coating of the Nikon 70-200mm VRII just makes this lens more enjoyable since it resist flare very well. It has less vignetting when used with a FX camera compared to the VRI. I found that out when I used it to shoot an outdoor concert and the spot lights were pointing directly at me. If you look at the prices now, it will be indeed a deterrent and it will make you wonder if the price difference is really worth it? If you are going to use it primarily on FX, then I would say yes. No if you are going to use it on DX.
    Thanks for your indepth advice it has given me a lot to think about. I would really like to use this lens mainly on the D700, it seems since I purchased this camera a few months ago the D7000 does tend to sit on the shelf.

    Quote Originally Posted by gqtuazon View Post
    A light weight version would be the the Nikon 85mm f1.4G for portrait or if you are on a budget get the Sigma 85mm f1.4 HSM instead which really works well for me. Physically, the VRI has a red "VR" letters and the VRII version has gold VR letters. Here are some random shots using the newer Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VRII.

    When shooting with both cameras, I use the 24-70 with the D700 and 70-200mm VRII with the D7000. I hope you are up for the extra weight if you decide to do this plus the speed lights.
    I already own a Nikon 50mm f1.8 and the 24-70mm f2.8 and the VRII was the next on the wish list. Thanks for the photos they really help as well. I know when doing a portrait shoot it is better to have 2 cameras working and I would consider using the set up you have suggested. I guess it comes down to do I spent about $1,500 now knowing I would want to upgrade eventually? As Kiwi has stated it might be better to have the VRI version than none at all

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •