Review of the New 70-200mm f2.8G ED VRII

[Jed]

Sigh. Neither. It is taken using a very good lens, it's just out of focus and nothing to do with the quality of the lens. I'm just trying to illustrate that you cannot tell how sharp a lens is or isn't, just by looking at 800 pixel images. Almost any lens in the world can produce a sharp 800 pixel wide image, assuming you've not made a mess in some other way.

 

[xintothezonex]

you missed the point completely.

Sigh. Neither. It is taken using a very good lens, it's just out of focus and nothing to do with the quality of the lens. I'm just trying to illustrate that you cannot tell how sharp a lens is or isn't, just by looking at 800 pixel images. Almost any lens in the world can produce a sharp 800 pixel wide image, assuming you've not made a mess in some other way.

paiseh.. paiseh..
sori lar..

 

[nightpiper]

Hi Jed, how's it going for u? I totally agree with what u said

On top of that, there isn't much info of the FL used in those wedding shots where he claimed no vignetting. It could be all the way to 200mm, thats why. As for the last wedding shot 100% crop, where he said SHARP wide open, i'm really skeptical, its not showing the eyes & judging from the bit of eye brow/lash, its.... ummm.... :sweat::sweat:

Finally here's a little read to stress on the point of judging a "sharp pic" by small screen size
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/rant23b.shtml

Have fun!!

 

[KCONE]

I am no pro but judging from the wedding pics that showcase the new lens, I am not impressed at all. I have already sold my VR1 but now, I am not going to get the VRII based on the samples produced by this pro photographer.

But most people are jumping on the bandwagon praising how sharp the VRII is at the corners etc. I am bewildered.

 

[Jed]

Yes, as I said in my first post, the 100% crop didn't even look that good.

I am quite happy to attribute any problems to the photographer at the moment rather than the lens, and given how atrocious the original 70-200 is I have little doubt it will be an important upgrade in terms of image quality.

I notice though that instead of fixing the AF lock buttons they've decided to just do away with them which is a shame.

 

[Lomographer]

at that price, i am going to stick to my old 70-200.

damn. and i thought i might have found something to buy.....

good call.

not rly worth the price it's going at.

i think even my 70-300 is good enough

 

[froisnaidu]

so whats going to happen the old afs 70-200mm and afd 80-200mm once this hits stores...discontinued?

 

[Jed]

That's Nikon's call. Fairly sure it will replace the 70-200VR but there's no reason to discontinue the 80-200D if they kept it in production during the six years the 70-200VR was in production.

 

[NineEleven]

This lens is about S$3000 here in KL & I've been waiting for a while to hit the button with the 70-200. Does anyone know how's the prices doing for Nikon in HongKong now? Especially when the exchange rate is very favourable lately.

 

[littlelion]

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

It's so poisonous

http://cliffmautner.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/10/101309-the-new-nikon-70200mm-f28g-ed-vrii.html

 

[garagez]

it was earlier here

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=588907&highlight=70-200mm+vr+II

 

[blackman]

It has already been posted here long time ago..
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=588907

 

[Francis247]

Thread Merged.

 

[catohcat]

I compared the old 70-200 VR & new 70-200 VRII in the recent Nikon Airsoft event, there is no different in the image quality & sharpness. Even the color tone produced is the same. The only significant different is the VR performance, 70-200 VRII rock!

 

[blackman]

I compared the old 70-200 VR & new 70-200 VRII in the recent Nikon Airsoft event, there is no different in the image quality & sharpness. Even the color tone produced is the same. The only significant different is the VR performance, 70-200 VRII rock!

What camera do you use for comparison? If DX camera, it should not have big difference in IQ as shown in the MTF charts.

 

[catohcat]

What camera do you use for comparison? If DX camera, it should not have big difference in IQ as shown in the MTF charts.

I tested using the D3 there. The guys in Nikon also commented that it's also hard to differentiate the pictures from two lens. Perhaps not a full comparison test is done yet, I'll wait for Dpreview then =D

 

[Benosaurous]

i think you are getting a much better vr2 with the premium price, for those who thinks it helps to achieve in the photos they wanted, its a good buy, for those who feel not a good bargain, as their technique can compensate it, it's not worthwhile. simple.

for me, if i can achieve sharp enough photos with the help of vr2 at 1/50 from 200mm (i couldnt, hands not that stable, tested with vr1 and 80-200), it is a real good lens, steep price, save more and no regrets or loss of $$ due to reselling again later.

waiting for dpreview for the fair test. i am really doubting sharp shots at 1/14 handheld at 200mm, too good to be true.

 

[Kit]

I adopt this mentality that IS/VR does not allow me to handhold any slower than what I can with other lenses. As that, I use them like any other lenses. Just that I get enhanced results with them.

 

[xtemujin]

Is there a white/grey version of this lens ?

I've looked at the official website but didn't see any white/grey version.

Thanks.

 

[MARTIN1023]

See the MTF Chart comparison below.

http://ganref.jp/magazines/index/1/0/340