Oops..that should be 'focal length breathing' not 'focus breathing.'
Oops..that should be 'focal length breathing' not 'focus breathing.'
Nikon FX + m43
davophoto.wordpress.com
Well I have definitely moved from wanting the VRI to now wanting the VRII and if im going to save all that money I may as well save for a little bit longer and get the latest model
if you're shooting DX, a second hand VR for $1600 make make more sense than paying a $600 premium for the extra FX performance that you won't notice. i've never regretted my VR purchase and i use it a lot on both DX and FX. having said that, at the time of purchasing, the VRII was not out, and so the VR was really at the top of the list. if you're a buy once-buy right kind of guy, then it makes sense to get the best in breed from the get go, which is the VRII right now.
Thanks,
Nam
Yeah ive been reading that some people are really not happy with the zoom and wish they stuck with the VRI. Ive never had one so wont know about the difference. I think im up to about $750 now. Anyone selling theres for $750 or do i have to keep saving?
My PBase site: http://www.pbase.com/lance_b
My Flickr site: https://www.flickr.com/photos/35949907@N02/
It shouldn't be!.. not for anyone!
This focal length issue(or more accurately! NON issue) was a hilarious 'debate' recounted on various fora, and exacerbated by people who knwo nothing of technical writing. The info was plain as day on Nikon's blurb on the VRII and that max magnification was down on the original version.
That simple technical spec VRII has a reproduction ratio of 0.12x at a closer focused distance, and VRI version had a repro ratio of 0.16x at a further focused distance. Simple maths at work. Longer subject distance plus higher magnification is always going to give you a 'longer focal length' and vice versa.
The fact that the VRII lens had a shorter focused distance and lower magnification specs was the devils work apparently, and Nikon stuffed up.(since when was the lens ever marketed as a macro lens anyhow!? )
The fact was totally lost on these loudmouth morons that maintained their arguments about the focal length shortening of the lens, when even their precious macro lenses do the same thing!
The lens that doesn't succumb to focal length shortening is very rare nowadays, and it's almost certainly a very old design and one that extends a lot.. massively!.. when focused closer and closer.
As already said, reading too many reviews can do your head in, and the hard part is to filter out the chaff. (ie, the bunk info that is usually a total waste of time).
Wow great thread guys, and perfect timing!
I have just started looking into something in the range of 70/80-200mm, and this has been a great help.
Now to find me some of that pesky cash!
D3100, 18-55, 55-200
Sigma 17-70mm
More to come!
stop reading opinions and reviews. just save like no tomorrow. either one will be awesome. but if NAS is killing you, the VRI will satisfy it sooner.
Okay I've recounted and up to $800 and saving for the VRII still
I can't help reading reviews NAM I try to be as well informed as I can but overall this s clearly an exceptional lens.
Gosh, after reading all of this I Want A 70-200 lens!!!!! Where's my money tree!??
Sue-ann
Nikon D700/D90 | Nikkor 14-24/2.5 | Nikkor 50/1.8 | Nikkor 24-70/2.8 | Nikkor 105/2.8 | Nikon Speedlight SB-600 | Think Tank Streetwalker
My Flickr Site
Save your money , I bought a VRII about 3 months ago and wonder now how I got by without it before , hard to take a bad photo technically with it , sharp as , fast auto focus on everything from
sprintcars on an oval track to horses at a Campdraught and then throw it's portrait qualities into the mix , no brainer if you ask me , kids get used to having one kidney or different parents eventually LOL
LOL@Goatch,Great pics Goatch, Im still saving for the VRII. Every now and then I see a VRI going cheap and wonder if I should get that instead but in the back of my mind I just keep saying to myself that I will not be happy with the old model and will kick myself if I do.kids get used to having one kidney or different parents eventually
New total $1000 saved so far.
I need my wife LuciIV (yes she does take after her name sake, just kidding babe xxx lol) to get a couple more jobs
Mate wait for the VR II , you won't be disappointed , I have gone through all the stages of photonotsharpenenufftosatisfyme disease and it is the cure!!!!
Yes in relation to this lens I have stopped reading reviews and now just saving to buy it
nice pan goatch
FYI the sigma 70-200 just won European lens of the year
Darren
Gear : Nikon Goodness
Website : http://www.peakactionimages.com
Please support Precious Hearts
Constructive Critique of my images always appreciated
Yes but is it better than the Nikon? Would you buy the siggy over the Nikon?
No, it's close to but not better but I bet mostly the resulting images would be indistinguishable in every day shooting
Would I still buy the Nikon ? If I had the money, if I didn't I'd have no hesitation
The point is moot now