Superb Lens! but tripod collar should be included

[Alan Ernst]

Excellent lens both optically (tack sharp throughout) and ergonomically (well balanced for handholding). Also love the close focusing capability. I did have to try two units though as the first one was not convincing at the 70mm end. I use it with my D5200, which gives me 105-300mm equivalent and covers 95% of my tele needs. The one stop loss compared to the f2.8 is certainly more than made up by the lower weight and bulk, making it a great lens to carry along all the time.
I's unfortunate that a lens in this price bracket comes without the tripod collar though - this should be included... If it was, I would give it five stars easy.

 

[Chuck Yadmark]

I wouldn't mind having one to lighten my load.

I noticed that there are knockoff tripod collars for 20 bucks on eBay as opposed to the somewhat preposterous 189 official

 

[Leonard Shepherd]

With the 5 stops speed gain of VR III (at a longer focused distances) the need for a tripod colour is less essential.

It is a similar weight to the 70-300 which does not have a tripod collar. As the launch guidance suggests (most tripod heads can be turned 90 degrees) the main attraction of a collar is primarily convenience shooting in portrait mode.

On price the UK suggested of £1,773 (without collar) is now around £999. Selling a very good lens at 35% off list price less than 6 months after launch does not seem to do much for Nikon's UK credibility.

--
Leonard Shepherd
Many problems turn out to be a lack of intimate knowledge as to how to get the best out of modern and often complex camera equipment.

 

[HomoSapiensWannaBe]

I use the Kirk collar with the 70-200/4G VR. It is not necessary in good light, but for landscape, portrait and closeup work on a tripod, or sports on a monopod, it is great kit!

 

[NikonShoot3r]

I purchased two collars - the $20 chinese knockoff off Ebay and Kirk Collar. Needless to say, the knockoff is junk. Why skimp on collar on a $1400 lens?

 

[Vladi Stoimenov]

Alan,

I don't know is it possible for you to buy something in general from Amazon.de, there is a relative
low-cost tripod, please try
http://www.amazon.de/GUMP-Stativsch...-200mm/dp/B00BIZMOEQ/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

Vladi

 

[nkistrup]

HomoSapiensWannaBe wrote:

I use the Kirk collar with the 70-200/4G VR. It is not necessary in good light, but for landscape, portrait and closeup work on a tripod, or sports on a monopod, it is great kit!

The Kirk lens collar never comes off. Will loosen it for portrait mode, but since I always shoot w. either monopod or tripod, the lens collar is a must have.

Regarding why one isn't included? Glad that Nikon didn't: Makes it easier to justify getting a good lens collar.

But agreed that the 70-200 f4 is great lens. Was shocked how well it handles wildlife ... didn't think 200mm was long enough.

 

[Hasa]

Hi,

I also love my 70-200mm. I often shoot with the Nikon TC1,7. Great for birds, bugs, flowers with and without the TC. I believe it gives a genuine advantage measured by the fact that I get better resolution of bees' feet with TC than without - at the same distance of 1 metre, so there are several factors in play here. I don't claim this to be a scientific test, but for practical purposes I get more detail at 1 m with the TC. Depth of field becomes even more narrow so I tend to shoot bees at F13 (effective F13 - shown in the EXIF along with 340 mm as effective focal length). There is still terrific bokeh. Great combo. I can crop images down to 3 Megapixel and they are still good. In fact I am sure the centre is pin sharp at F7.1. The problem is that the F7.1 depth of sharpness is extremely shallow, so I tend to not shoot at F7.1. I am including the image of the pollen sack of the bee as an example of centre sharpness at F7.1 w. TC1.7 - and everything else is a blurry mess :-(







--
Smile and the world smiles back!

 

[chuhsi]

that's incredible!

 

[hikerdoc]

Really Right Stuff also has collar with detachable foot, although more expensive than Kirk (but similar to Nikon price). The foot also works with the 300 f/4 and the 70-200 f/2.8.

I agree that rather than increased cost for an included Nikon foot/collar the replacements are compatible with QR systems without the need to purchase additional foot or plate anyway.

 

[larrywilson]

Yes no need for a collar for the light Nikon 70-200 f4.0 lens. My L bracket on both of my cameras does the trick. Tired of spending extra money for additional stuff not needed.

Larry

 

[Friedrich von Hrsten]

Just come back from 3 weeks in Zimbabwe, and am very impressed with this lens.

* It is a solid lens that inspires confidence

* The slim design is perfect for hand holding

* Sharper at 200mm f4 than both my previous f2.8 VR1 versions

* works very well with my 1.4 tc on the D600

* a perfect partner for my heavier 200-400mm f4 lens

Does it need a tripod collar? I doubt it! It is made for action and walking around unencumbered...

I love it!

God bless,

Friedrich von Hörsten, South Africa

 

[chuhsi]

I'm really wondering why some people think this needs an L-Bracket from the factory. I'm doing fine without one.

 

[larrywilson]

The L bracket is made to fit a certain brand of tripod locking mount. Also an L bracket enables a person to mount the camera directly over the ballhead in the landscape or portrait position. Without an L bracket the camera has to be hung off to the side of a ball head throwing the weight balance off. L bracket is very, very handy.

Larry

 

[chuhsi]

haha. i mis-typed my email. i have an L-bracket and was wondering why people need a COLLAR for this lens.

 

[hikerdoc]

True, the weight is somewhere between the 85 f/1.4 and the 24-70 f/2.8 neither of which I use a collar for. I have no 70-200 f/4 but do collar/RRS foot the 2.8.

 

[Ken323]

Alan, so what happened to your 1st lens at 70mm? What test did you use to come to that conclusion? I'm expecting my new lens to arrive in a couple of days, so I just want to make sure that I don't have the same problem.

Thanks../Ken

 

[hewhosculpts]

A tripod collar on this lens would be basically useless on a D800 or other semipro or pro body so I'm glad I didn't have to pay for something I'm not going to use.