Those AWFUL 70-200 Nikon Zooms! ;-) Locked

Started Feb 18, 2013 | Discussions thread
This thread is locked.
PatrickP Contributing Member • Posts: 716
Re: Those AWFUL 70-200 Nikon Zooms! ;-)

I can see the pain of the OP. Same dilemma here. If the 70-200 f/2.8 VR2 does not have the focus breathing I would not even be bothered thinking about the f/4, since it would be purely a size/weight issue. Shooting the newer F4 lens at the 200mm marking, close to MFD, for half an hour and I realized what I've been missing and what "200mm" really means.

I did attempted a few family weddings with the f/2.8 VR2 and frankly the 200mm end at close range was really a bit short. (Sure some real Pros would disagree While the IQ at "200mm" is supreme it was a 135mm-160mm lens at close distances. It was just so bad that I almost wanted to mount a 1.4X TC to ratify the situaton... just that I prefer 70mm on the wide end, not 70*1.4=98mm. Back then I was shooting a D700 so every pixel counted. The huge pixel count and 1.2x crop mode on the D800E does help the situation quite a bit however.


Shotcents wrote:

I added the smiley face, BUT I am actually a bit serious about it. After trying the newest version of the Canon 70-200 2.8 I'm left shaking my head at Nikon's subpar efforts. It's very simple to break down.

1) Nikon 70-200 VRII - This lens is wonderful in ALMOST every way. It's even a bit better than the Canon optically, but the VRII has one insanely bad element. Focus breathing. What kind of two-bit engineer redesigns a classic zoom, often listed among the best for portraits and wedding work, and then leaves it with the worst focus breathing this side of the 18-200vr DX? You just paid well over 2 grand for a 70-200 that is actually a 65-133mm lens. I love mine, but I'd really like a lens that actually gets something close to 200mm since that's what I paid for.

2) Nikon 70-200 VR F4 - Oh my! I hate this lens. It's great. Great optics. Great handling. It holds much more of it's 200mm at close focus and it has very good VR. And then Nikon made it an F4. For gods sakes if I want anything close to the 2.8 and 200mm of any of these lenses I'm left with...the 70-200 VR1.

3) Nikon 70-200 VRI - Let's face it. This is still the best design. It's sharp. It's beautifully built. It has some softness in the corners, but that's not going to effect folks who use it for what it was designed for. Optically it's a step behind the VRII, but it's a small step. And you get a lens quite close to a true 70-200mm. Well done, Nikon of yesteryear!

Now....if you want a Nikon lens that does what the Canon version does so well, you need to buy TWO of them!

And that's my Monday rant. I hope a new 70-200 2.8 won't be too far off.


-- hide signature --

D800E, 16-35/4, 24-70/2.8, 70-200 VR2, TC-20E3, 28-300VR, 24/1.4G, 50/1.8G, 85/1.8G.

 PatrickP's gear list:PatrickP's gear list
Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR +4 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow