Sample pics with the New Nikkor 70-200 F/2.8 VR II

Based on the comments, and samples, I think I will stay with the VRI version on my D300. It is giving me everything, and more, that I want.
--
JohnE
I have enjoyed taking these images: http://www.pbase.com/jpower

Below, Phoenix City Hall with Nikkor 10.5mm on D200

For me, I think the new version has really big improvement. After moving from D300 to D700, my first impression is "What's wrong with my 70-200mm?". Dark corners plus noticeable softness even at the center make the unprocessed shots much different between D300 and D700. Tried it again on a DX camera and the magic is back. Hmm...

There is no right or wrong. I don't have to be wrong for you to be correct. If you need it, just get it. Even with VR-I, after running through my DXO processing, the picture still can be really sharp.

Get or not get the latest version is purely individual decision. It's just a hobby.

--
.. http://minxie.smugmug.com ..

azguy said:

Based on the comments, and samples, I think I will stay with the VRI version on my D300. It is giving me everything, and more, that I want.
--

Click to expand...

I agree that those with a DX are very well served by the excellent old version.

Max Green

--
Get your hands up or I'll shoot!!!

D700, D40, D90, Nikon 24-70, Nikon 70-200 II (Pending), Sigma 50mm 1.4, Tamron 28-300 VC, Tamron 180mm Macro, Nikon 70-300vr, Sigma 50mm 1.4 HSM

Max Green said:

I agree that those with a DX are very well served by the excellent old version.

Click to expand...

Really? I can see plenty of room for improvement at the edges and corners at 200mm f2.8 on my D2x.

I can't afford the new version and have no intention of getting it, but I wouldn't put the old version on a pedestal for DX users... it could be a fair bit better.

--
Have Fun
Photo Pete

Photo Pete said:

Max Green said:

I agree that those with a DX are very well served by the excellent old version.

Click to expand...

Really? I can see plenty of room for improvement at the edges and corners at 200mm f2.8 on my D2x.

I can't afford the new version and have no intention of getting it, but I wouldn't put the old version on a pedestal for DX users... it could be a fair bit better.

Click to expand...

Pete, I had two samples of the old version on my D200's and D300's. Neither had those issues at the edges, nor have I heard of any that did...until my friend bough a used copy from KEH that did have soft corners, especially on the left side. Sounds like you may have a lens of the same batch or same issue.

As I'm sure you're aware the 70-200 was always reviewed as sharp in the corners on DX, so you almost certainly have a bad copy. Before FX, the only complaints were the flare, weight, size and cost. FX added soft edges and darkening.

New version fixes that, but if I still shot with DX much I'd have kept the old version. It was faultless.

Max Green

--
Get your hands up or I'll shoot!!!

D700, D40, D90, Nikon 24-70, Nikon 70-200 II (Pending), Sigma 50mm 1.4, Tamron 28-300 VC, Tamron 180mm Macro, Nikon 70-300vr, Sigma 50mm 1.4 HSM

Max, you sound like an apologist for Nikon. That might explain your early exposure to the new lens. Just saying. As to jealousy... that would presuppose I couldn't afford the lens. You'd be wrong.

Saffron_Blaze said:

Max, you sound like an apologist for Nikon. That might explain your early exposure to the new lens. Just saying. As to jealousy... that would presuppose I couldn't afford the lens. You'd be wrong.> > >

Click to expand...

I've used the lens. I know what it can do, which is why I sold my lesser version and pre-ordered.

You don't have to believe me or the other early rave reviews. But eventually the evidence will pile up and you'll know that the 70-200 II is quite a bit nicer, especially on FX. And that will be that...and maybe you'll get one too!

Max Green

--
Get your hands up or I'll shoot!!!

D700, D40, D90, Nikon 24-70, Nikon 70-200 II (Pending), Sigma 50mm 1.4, Tamron 28-300 VC, Tamron 180mm Macro, Nikon 70-300vr, Sigma 50mm 1.4 HSM

Indeed, but I won't resort ad hominen attacks by calling people silly or say they are jealous when they disagree with me. That aside, how do you account for the softness in the corners of the photos that have been posted in this thread?

Max Green said:

Saffron_Blaze said:

Max, you sound like an apologist for Nikon. That might explain your early exposure to the new lens. Just saying. As to jealousy... that would presuppose I couldn't afford the lens. You'd be wrong.> > >

Click to expand...

I've used the lens. I know what it can do, which is why I sold my lesser version and pre-ordered.

You don't have to believe me or the other early rave reviews. But eventually the evidence will pile up and you'll know that the 70-200 II is quite a bit nicer, especially on FX. And that will be that...and maybe you'll get one too!

Max Green

--
Get your hands up or I'll shoot!!!

D700, D40, D90, Nikon 24-70, Nikon 70-200 II (Pending), Sigma 50mm 1.4, Tamron 28-300 VC, Tamron 180mm Macro, Nikon 70-300vr, Sigma 50mm 1.4 HSM

Click to expand...

Saffron_Blaze said:

Indeed, but I won't resort ad hominen attacks by calling people silly or say they are jealous when they disagree with me. That aside, how do you account for the softness in the corners of the photos that have been posted in this thread?

Click to expand...

I see very little softness compared to the old version. It looks at least as good as the 80-200 and it's wide open. In addition to that there are now plenty of samples and reports showing very little corner darkening and even sharper images at the center.

Of course I've seen this 1st hand.

Since the old version was one of the most beloved zooms by pros going, why not wait for some official reports before you shoot this lens down.

But I'll tell you this...and you'll know soon enough...the 70-200 II sets the benchmark for a lens of this type, just like the 14-24 and 24-70. If that extra ounce of performance is not worth it for you, don't buy it.

I don't own the 14-24, great as it is, because I don't use that range enough. I've borrowed it when needed, but the 24-70 is a favorite and the spot in my kit is reserved for the 70-200 II.

Max Green

--
Get your hands up or I'll shoot!!!

D700, D40, D90, Nikon 24-70, Nikon 70-200 II (Pending), Sigma 50mm 1.4, Tamron 28-300 VC, Tamron 180mm Macro, Nikon 70-300vr, Sigma 50mm 1.4 HSM

I see very little difference between F/2.8 and F/5.6 !

lock

Bottom line..If you have FX..this will be better suited for you! This is why I have ordered it. What we need is samples with both the VRI and VRII, with a DX and the same test with FX. I think this would be a more than adequate assessment.

I´ve posted this review several times, but noone seems to look at it. It´s a review of the new 70-200 on a d3x.

http://www.digitalcamaralens.com/Html/Objetivos/Nikon/Nikkor%2070-200%202.8%20VR%20II/Nikkor%2070-200%202.8%20II%20-%20Const.%20y%20Erg.htm

here you can see chart crops at 200 (corner)

70-200 vrII f3.5 15mts



70-200 vrI f3.5 15 mts



This is a site you can trust!

sorry I´ve made a mess, this is the corner from vr2



this one from vr1

There is a blurr going to the lower right corner. To me this is motion blurr. This is not a general unsharpness due to lens imperfection of the Vr I.

lock

motion blur?

this is a center crop, the image is the same than the corner crop I´ve just posted, if there´s no motion blur in the center... how can it be in the corner? The problem is that vr1 is that bad on d3x...



now look at this sample on the field at 200mm f5.6, look at the crappy extreme corners... and it´s f5.6!!! imagine f2.8 for a moment...

http://www.digitalcamaralens.com/Html/Objetivos/Nikon/Nikkor%2070-200%202.8%20VR/Galeria%20D3x/2350JPG.htm

Now almost the same pic with 70-200 vr2. Night and day in the corners.

http://www.digitalcamaralens.com/Html/Objetivos/Nikon/Nikkor%2070-200%202.8%20VR%20II/Galeria%20Comparable/8395JPG.htm