Nikon 70-200 VRII vs Canon 70-200 Zoom Test! Interesting results! Locked

Started Dec 4, 2009 | Discussions
This thread is locked.
proartfoto
Forum MemberPosts: 60
Nikon 70-200 VRII vs Canon 70-200 Zoom Test! Interesting results!
Dec 4, 2009

First off let me start off saying that I am not here to bash on any brand of camera and/or lens. As the professional photographer with over 11 years of experience it was interesting for me to see all the threads about new Nikon 70-200 VRII problem. While everybody is comparing this lens to older and original Nikon 70-200 VRI, I decided to do something totally wild and crazy. Here is what I’ve done, here is my setup:

1. Canon EOS 5-D Mk I with Canon EOS 70-200mm F2.8 IS lens (images stabilizer)
2. Nikon D700 with Nikkor 70-200mm F2.8 VRII (Brand new lens, just got it)

The distance from sensor to the subject is 6 feet exactly (I measured!). The focus used is CENTER and focus is always on "CHICCO" writing in the middle (for both of the setups). All the images are RAW with Lightroom straight conversion.

The idea here is that distance should be within +or- 5% difference between the cameras and or lens. What I found out was totally crazy, here are my results:

As they say "A picture is worth a thousand words", I think the results are speaking for themselves. This is a MAJOR {HUGE!} problem for Nikon and the problem is not with quality or any other issues with this lens, per say. The problem is that Nikon falsely advertises and charges $2400 for the lens that is simply no where even close to what it is trying to be.

Nikon's lens costs $500 dollars more than Canon's L series lens. Yes, in my opinion Nikon performs better, but at what cost? Loosing that 200mm zoom is everything in the world.

So what is the problem? What happened there? How come Nikon’s lens the way it is? It seems to me that Nikon engineers where designing this lens on DX test rig. What is so surprising to me is that none of Quality Control or early testers noticed this huge problem.

Conclusion: I love Nikon and Nikon's lens, but this latest offering is a total bust. Yes the saturation, autofocus, sharpness, etc. , etc. is better than previous version. But the loss of that entire zoom is a total killer for me (I am a wedding photographer!). I think that we should return all of our 70-200mm VRII lens and none of us should buy them. This way we will send a message to Nikon that will be hard to ignore.

James Youngman
Regular MemberPosts: 347
Re: Nikon 70-200 VRII vs Canon 70-200 Zoom Test! Interesting results!
In reply to proartfoto, Dec 4, 2009

proartfoto wrote:

Conclusion: I love Nikon and Nikon's lens, but this latest offering is a total bust. Yes the saturation, autofocus, sharpness, etc. , etc. is better than previous version. But the loss of that entire zoom is a total killer for me (I am a wedding photographer!). I think that we should return all of our 70-200mm VRII lens and none of us should buy them. This way we will send a message to Nikon that will be hard to ignore.

So, just so I'm clear here, what image are you saying you could create with the Canon lens (or, I suppose the Nikkor VR1 lens) but which is not possible with the Nikkor VR2 lens?

anotherMike
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,967
Re: Nikon 70-200 VRII vs Canon 70-200 Zoom Test! Interesting results!
In reply to proartfoto, Dec 4, 2009

Yawn, more of the same.

Funny how over on Nikongear people talk about what the lens is really good at, like it's performance at other focal lengths and distances, and while mentioning it does have limitations at 200mm and closer distance, not harping on it anywhere near the level of what this forum has become. Like most things, the new lens isn't going to be for everyone, but you know what, some of us actually shoot at other focal lengths besides 200mm, and, shock, actually shoot at longer distances, and - gasp - might really appreciate the world class image quality that the new lens seems to offer in these situations.

Go ahead and return yours if you can't live with it's limitations, but telling everyone to do so? I don't think so.

And by the way, it's "losing", not "loosing".

-m

JeffreyL
New MemberPosts: 22
Re: Nikon 70-200 VRII vs Canon 70-200 Zoom Test! Interesting results!
In reply to anotherMike, Dec 4, 2009

Why do people complain about the shortened focal length? the VRII gives you 1:8.3 reproduction ratio, which is mostly enough for a head shot. A 10' face will cover the whole frame. The 85mm f/1.4 or 200mm f/2 has similar production ratio, but nobody whine about that.

Andre De Angelis
Senior MemberPosts: 2,191
Re: Nikon 70-200 VRII vs Canon 70-200 Zoom Test! Interesting results!
In reply to JeffreyL, Dec 4, 2009

JeffreyL wrote:

The 85mm f/1.4 or 200mm f/2 has similar production ratio, but nobody whine about that.

Really? If that why at 6.2 feet, the 200F2 produces 50% more magnification than the VR2?

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=33875563

JeffreyL
New MemberPosts: 22
Re: Nikon 70-200 VRII vs Canon 70-200 Zoom Test! Interesting results!
In reply to Andre De Angelis, Dec 4, 2009

Move closer. The min focus distance of VRII is 1.4mm. It is 1.9mm for 200 f/2. You need to step in 0.5m to get similar coverage. 200mm f/2 gives you a little big coverage. The production ratio of VRII is 1/8.3 vs. 1/8.1 of 200 f/2

proartfoto
Forum MemberPosts: 60
Re: Nikon 70-200 VRII vs Canon 70-200 Zoom Test! Interesting results!
In reply to proartfoto, Dec 4, 2009

I am not trying to offend anybody and I am not here or bash on any product. Some of you mentioned that 200mm zoom is achieved at infinity. I did the test with both lenses and bodies and here is what I got:

Seems like Nikon 70-200mm VRII is very different lens with the new design that we are not used to or simply don’t understand (at least in my case!). So I take my early judgment back.

Nikon 70-200MM f2.8 VRII is one fine lens that I am proud to have in my bag!

cesiocosta
New MemberPosts: 16
Re: Nikon 70-200 VRII vs Canon 70-200 Zoom Test! Interesting results!
In reply to JeffreyL, Dec 4, 2009

It seems to me, comparing photos, there's a difference at 70mm, nikon having more angle of view. Coming close with Nikon, adjusting same proportion to Canon, the difference at 200mm could be not so great or maybe minimum ?

Amador

1995m
Regular MemberPosts: 119
Re: Nikon 70-200 VRII vs Canon 70-200 Zoom Test! Interesting results!
In reply to proartfoto, Dec 4, 2009

I agree that the FL variation is excessive. I understand it will not work for you.

Perhaps the alternative is to stay with the v1. Or if you shoot that often at 6 feet then might as well use a 200mm f/2.

As for let's all return it. I am not with you. I understand it does not work for you. It's performance is however beautiful in everyway for what I use it for.

Andre De Angelis
Senior MemberPosts: 2,191
Re: Nikon 70-200 VRII vs Canon 70-200 Zoom Test! Interesting results!
In reply to JeffreyL, Dec 5, 2009

Moving closer is not always an option for a photojournalist in a photographic pool and moving closer also alters perspective.

maverick01
Contributing MemberPosts: 716
Re: Nikon 70-200 VRII vs Canon 70-200 Zoom Test! Interesting results!
In reply to proartfoto, Dec 5, 2009

That's one brutal picture there. But the Nikon is sharper and has better contrast than the Canon.

JeffreyL
New MemberPosts: 22
Re: Nikon 70-200 VRII vs Canon 70-200 Zoom Test! Interesting results!
In reply to maverick01, Dec 5, 2009

I don't understand how 200 f/2 will help. It can only produce 2% bigger image at 0.5m further, which is just an arm's length.

Anthony Medici
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,682Gear list
The test was at minimum focus distance
In reply to Andre De Angelis, Dec 5, 2009

Andre De Angelis wrote:

Moving closer is not always an option for a photojournalist in a photographic pool and moving closer also alters perspective.

I can't see a photojournalist using the lens at MFD. Besides, you can't move closer than MFD without changing lenses. Since the test was only done at MFD, how do you know what the difference is at 20'? Or at 40'? Or at 60'?

It seems to me that the complaint is that the magnification is only 1/8.3 rather than 1/6.1. The question become so what is the size of the subject you plan to shoot? 12" or more and this lens is fine. If the subject is smaller than that, you're not going to fill the frame.

The lens obviously makes for a bad macro lens.

 Anthony Medici's gear list:Anthony Medici's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon 1 V2
Anthony Medici
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,682Gear list
OMG!
In reply to proartfoto, Dec 5, 2009

It seems longer than the Canon at Infinity. I hope there won't be a clamor about that too.

 Anthony Medici's gear list:Anthony Medici's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon 1 V2
SUPERHOKIE
Contributing MemberPosts: 961
Re: OMG!
In reply to Anthony Medici, Dec 5, 2009

so, at minimum focusing distance is the VRII a 60mm or a 65mm?

That is one unexpected feature that I'm glad to have!

atikorn
New MemberPosts: 16
Re: Nikon 70-200 VRII vs Canon 70-200 Zoom Test! Interesting results!
In reply to proartfoto, Dec 5, 2009

IF you understand why 60mm macro and 105mm macro have the same magnification ratio, you will not judge something like this.

Nothing's wrong with the design of Nikon. If you want the same magnification as Canon 70-200mm does, Please take one more step closer, and you might get the same result. Remember the closest focus range is 4.6 ft??

OK...It might be not a very good macro lens, however other performances of the new VRII are far more superior than the old design and Canon.

Thank

em_dee_aitch
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,675
Re: Nikon 70-200 VRII vs Canon 70-200 Zoom Test! Interesting results!
In reply to proartfoto, Dec 5, 2009

proartfoto wrote:

Conclusion: I love Nikon and Nikon's lens, but this latest offering is a total bust. Yes the saturation, autofocus, sharpness, etc. , etc. is better than previous version. But the loss of that entire zoom is a total killer for me (I am a wedding photographer!). I think that we should return all of our 70-200mm VRII lens and none of us should buy them. This way we will send a message to Nikon that will be hard to ignore.

Can I get an Amen?! Speak it, Bro!

We do need to send a loud message on this. Part of me wants to keep this thing, because it is very nice, but it also sucks. I have never been so divided over any product. I should not be so divided over anything that I keep that costs 2900 (including cost of TC 1.4x). I'm now leaning toward return, even though I like the way it performs with TC 1.4x. Essentially, in the "wedding photographer distance range" of 5 to 20 feet, the VR2 + TC is a $2900 superb 100-210mm f/4 zoom, which is totally absurd. GREAT images with TC 1.4x, but ABSURD!!!

-- hide signature --

David Hill
http://www.sfbayweddingphotographer.com
San Francisco, CA | Austin, TX
Certified Wedding Photography Junky™

em_dee_aitch
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,675
Re: Nikon 70-200 VRII vs Canon 70-200 Zoom Test! Interesting results!
In reply to JeffreyL, Dec 5, 2009

JeffreyL wrote:

I don't understand how 200 f/2 will help. It can only produce 2% bigger image at 0.5m further, which is just an arm's length.

The difference are huge. Angle of view for sake of your background, OOF character (i.e. bokeh), distance to subject, being able to get up in people's grill without literally being up in their grill... This lens is a total mixed bag. It's a winner and a loser. It complicates our decisions rather than simplifying them. If you own both, as I do at the moment, it is difficult to decide which one to use. Even at a given event, the one that would be best at a given moment will change every 5 minutes. It's ridiculous.

-- hide signature --

David Hill
http://www.sfbayweddingphotographer.com
San Francisco, CA | Austin, TX
Certified Wedding Photography Junky™

WCguy
Contributing MemberPosts: 951Gear list
Re: Nikon 70-200 VRII vs Canon 70-200 Zoom Test! Interesting results!
In reply to em_dee_aitch, Dec 5, 2009

I think you should return it and move on.
--
It's What You Learn After You Know It All That Counts !

 WCguy's gear list:WCguy's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5 Sony RX1 Nikon D700 Nikon 1 V1 Nikon 1 AW1 +31 more
Joeyc923
Junior MemberPosts: 47
Re: Nikon 70-200 VRII vs Canon 70-200 Zoom Test! Interesting results!
In reply to em_dee_aitch, Dec 5, 2009

em_dee, just a thought, have you tried this lens on a DX body? I know it sounds ridiculous, but I think this lens is just perfect for DX, kind of like having the 1.4TC built into the camera LOL.

Obviously this is ridiculous because the whole point of this thing was that it's corners are optimized for FX, but I've been using it on my D90 today and the focal range doesn't seem to be much of an issue, likely because of the built in crop of the DX sensor. . . .

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads