70-400 II produce worst images than version I?

Started Sep 2, 2013 | Discussions thread
raylinds Junior Member • Posts: 37
Re: 70-400 II produce worst images than version I?

I just got my version II last night and haven't had time to really put it to the test yet. I have never used a G I, so I can't compare.  I have to say it is an extremely well built lens- very solid and heavy.  I can't imagine hand holding very often.  The AF was shockingly fast. I was suprised to see that in all but the brightest light, the lens was really off-white.

The G I has the same excellent build quality and optics, and if it has slightly less AF speed, I would imagine it would be plenty fast enough.  The silver vs. white is a personal taste thing, and I'm not sure either is ideal for wildlife photography, thus the aftermarket camo kits. I'm thinking I probably could have saved a few bucks by getting the G I and would have been perfectly happy, but I'm not complaining.

If I owned a G I, I doubt I would feel compelled to upgrade (but, again, I have never used one). IMHO the G II is just so fast, a somewhat slower focus would be perfectly acceptable. Unless you are often in shooting situations that require lightening fast focus, I can't imagine not being estatic with the G I.

 raylinds's gear list:raylinds's gear list
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX DG Macro HSM Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Nikon 85mm F1.8G Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM Art +1 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow