vr1 versus vr2

[firepix]

I've read that Nikon's 70-200 2.8 vr1 works better on a dx camera as the vr 2 is better suited for fx. Not sure if there is any truth to that.

 

[Richard Weisgrau]

It is what most competent reviewers have reported.

--
Richard Weisgrau
http://www.weisgrau.com
Author of
The Real Business of Photography
The Photographer's Guide to Negotiating
Selling Your Photography
Licensing Photography

 

[SixDasher]

The I and II denominate the lens revision, not what VR is used. If it was, it would probably be VR5 or something.

--
I'z lovez my AiS'ez

 

[JC1306]

Correct. The VRI version is excellent in the center of the image but has a lot of distortion and vignetting towards the corners and since a DX camera only uses the center of the image anyway... The VRII isn't quite as good in the center (but still very good) but a lot better in the corners, making it the better lens for FX.

Jarno
--
Photos at http://jarno.smugmug.com

 

[nikoj]

From what I gather the VR2 performs excellent with both formats, where as VR1 shines as well as VR2 on DX. My personal experience with VR1 confirms the latter. Was going to sell the VR1 until I got my D7000 for which I find it an exceptional lens and I decided to keep it for a long while now.

 

[RustyKnee]

To the OP

I don't think its the VR I or II, its the lens design.

The I and II denominate the lens revision, not what VR is used. If it was, it would probably be VR5 or something.

--
I'z lovez my AiS'ez

Again no it doesn't!

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rabbitstu77/

 

[cluna]

Correct. The VRI version is excellent in the center of the image but has a lot of distortion and vignetting towards the corners

I wouldnt say lots of distortion and vignetting. It is a wonderful lens on even FF and VC takes of most of the issue in camera if you dont like it. I like the look anyways.

-C

 

[RustyKnee]

realised my post is ambiguous, there IS VR and VR2.

on topic, can't comment in the 70-200 VR, but the VR II is awesome on the D700.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rabbitstu77/

 

[Leonard Shepherd]

Nikon comment on the advantage of VR II near the bottom of page 1
http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/technology/scene/16/index.htm
--
Leonard Shepherd

Practicing and thinking can do more for good photography than buying or consuming.

 

[Mannypr]

Normally when there are a revised version of an FX lens that is better suited for the FX format then the first one it's because it's borders are superior optically. It's common sense that the lens with the best border performance ( being the center igually sharp ) to be the better lens for FX cameras. My Tamron lens , 28-75mm F2.8 is superb on DX and quite not as good on FX because it's border performance is nothing to write home about.

Apart from this just check out the reviews of both lens here in DPreview and you will see that there is quite a big difference between both lens in sharpness being the VR2 version much better.

 

[chris nolan]

Was going to sell the VR1 until I got my D7000 for which I find it an exceptional lens and I decided to keep it for a long while now.

Curious as I rented the VR-II when i had the D5000 body, man it was great, but I found it to focus slow on that body. I now own the D7000, and I was wondering if it will focus faster on the D7000 because the focus motor is on the D7000.

I really want to buy this lens, but eh VR II just seems too expensive, should i go for the VRI?
--
--
Nikon D7000 - SB-900
MB-D11 Battery Grip
Nikon 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5
Nikon 35mm f/1.8
Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6
Manfrotto 055XPROB, 488RC4
Canon Vixia HF20 - FCS v3.0
iMac 27" i7 16GB
MBP 15' late model '08

 

[Windancer]

I've read that Nikon's 70-200 2.8 vr1 works better on a dx camera as the vr 2 is better suited for fx. Not sure if there is any truth to that.

I've heard that too, I personally have had no problems with the VRI on my D700. Her is a couple of examples.

Regards
Terry













--
Graham Fine Art Photography
http://www.pbase.com/windancer
http://gallery.reginaphotoclub.com/TGraham
See my profile for all my equipment.

Disclaimer: This e-mail is intended to impart a sense of humor. Given e-mail's inability to carry inflections, tone and facial expressions it may fail miserably in its intent. The sender acknowledges the limitations of the technology and assigns to the software in which this message was composed any ill feelings that may arise. ;-)