First test of Nikon AF-S 70-200 f4 VR on D600 with 100% samples.

Bravo.

I love it when someone succinctly summarizes and responds to all the criticism in one post. It saves me typing effort as well

Like every other lens, this is not for everyone. Nikon knows that. Nikon also knows that there is sufficient pent up demand for this lens to make a valid business case for designing, manufacturing and selling it. As the last few years have shown, they seem to be the only major photography company with a consistently profitable (if only marginally) plan to re-attract and retain customers.

Nikon and the users who've been clamoring for a 70-200 F4 lens already know about all of your viewpoits. They don't care if you think the 2.8 (V1 or VII) is a better lens. They don't care if you think this is a 'slow' lens. Anyone who has a Nikon Pro/Prosumer camera with a D3 sensor or better is far less concerned about the difference between a 2.8 and 4 lens than people were 10 years ago. If it comes to that 2.8 is pretty slow for low light photography anyway. I have several primes (1.4 and 1.8) and a couple of 2.8 lenses I can use in that instance if needed (and I suspect that most potential buyers of the F4 Nikon do as well)

I own a Tamron lens (the excellent 28-75 2.8) and have found it to be nearly identical to the vaunted 24-70 Nikon in terms of IQ while handily beating it in the luggability and value-for-money department. I'm sure the Tammy 2.8 is a good lens but a lighter, faster focusing lens with an extra stop of VR is a better fit for what I'm looking for in a travel lens.

--

What you know imprisons you