The New 70-200 VRII NANO is out!!!

[talisman]

Overall, center and corner is improved for both DX and FX performance but at 70mm, the corner on FX is slightly poorer than the older lens. Definitely a better lens compared to the old one with less spherical aberration also since the meridional and saggital traces are closer to each other now.


New

Old

Thanks lsisaxon for the comments. You seem to be really knowledgeable (from reading ur posts over a period of time

Is the improvement really that great btw? ...how much sharper is an improvement of 0.1 on that scale? (is it a linear scale..i.e; 10% improvement?)

On the tele side, it seems that there is very slight improvement if not softer on the edges. (which where most likely this lens will be used) while most of the improvement seems to be on the wide side (70mm).

Of course, to be fair to this new lens...we are just looking at MTF charts so far.
We still have to see how it fares in real life and on colours, bokeh, flaring, CA, etc.

 

[jeanie]

lsisaxon=God of Nikon

period

 

[Clown]

Overall, center and corner is improved for both DX and FX performance but at 70mm, the corner on FX is slightly poorer than the older lens. Definitely a better lens compared to the old one with less spherical aberration also since the meridional and saggital traces are closer to each other now.


New

Old

yea the consistancy is due to better glass.
altho the glass is better i feel the corners could use a bit more tweaking to match the performance of image consistancy of the old one.

maybe the 2nd batch will be a bit better in real life.

 

[Lomographer]

yea the consistancy is due to better glass.
altho the glass is better i feel the corners could use a bit more tweaking to match the performance of image consistancy of the old one.

maybe the 2nd batch will be a bit better in real life.

so we should always not get the first batch and allow nikon to improve,

then we BBB

 

[talisman]

What kind of "tweaking" are you talking about??

 

[talisman]

lsisaxon=God of Nikon

period

Is he??!
*drop to my knees* ;p

 

[Clown]

What kind of "tweaking" are you talking about??

basically they're using larger elements to increase the image circle to solve the supposedly vignetting problem
the increased surface area of the new elements need a bit more shape adjustments to counter the loss of sharpness in the corners.

 

[lsisaxon]

Thanks lsisaxon for the comments. You seem to be really knowledgeable (from reading ur posts over a period of time

Is the improvement really that great btw? ...how much sharper is an improvement of 0.1 on that scale? (is it a linear scale..i.e; 10% improvement?)

On the tele side, it seems that there is very slight improvement if not softer on the edges. (which where most likely this lens will be used) while most of the improvement seems to be on the wide side (70mm).

Of course, to be fair to this new lens...we are just looking at MTF charts so far.
We still have to see how it fares in real life and on colours, bokeh, flaring, CA, etc.

From .1 to .2 is a 100% improvement or 2x. From .2 to .3 is a 50% improvement or 1.5x.

For each resolution, 10lpmm and 30lpmm, the performance is limited by the worst case for sagittal or meridional. If one is way better than the other like in the older version, it only means that the lens suffers from severe spherical aberration or coma.

In the new version, the S and M curves for each resolution are closer, so the aberration is reduced.

 

[talisman]

oh i see...that's interesting. thanks for that!

...and that would mean, there are 'improvements' made from different generations of lenses. It's a bit like cars...

Could I say that a 70-200 (1st version) has undergone the same few iterations of improvements since it was launched in 2003?
I.e; Y2003 batch is different from Y2008 batch?

 

[lsisaxon]

yea the consistancy is due to better glass.
altho the glass is better i feel the corners could use a bit more tweaking to match the performance of image consistancy of the old one.

maybe the 2nd batch will be a bit better in real life.

I don't think the MTF chart give you consistency information leh... It's basically a plot of contrast for sagittal and meridional lines at 10lpmm and 30lpmm versus the distance of the image from the centre. So at the x-axis, at 0, it means the centre, at 15, it means the corner for DX and at 21.5, it's the extreme corner for FX.

Like I mentioned in another posting, you should look at the worse case of the S and M at each resolution, doesn't make sense if concentric circles are sharp and radial lines are blur, right? In that aspect, the newer lens is sharper overall, except at 200mm where the old lens would perform marginally better (0.7 vs 0.6) than the new one over DX but the new lens beats the old one over FX.

 

[lsisaxon]

er...ok.layman terms please.
the smoother the curves, the sharper the lens ah?:bsmilie:

The higher the curves and the closer the solid line with the dashed line of the same colour, the sharper the lens.

 

[lsisaxon]

lsisaxon=God of Nikon

period

No I am NOT. ;p

This morning still wondering why haven't been seeing your posts for a while. Didn't know the release of the new 70-200VRII would start you posting again.. Ha!

 

[lsisaxon]

oh i see...that's interesting. thanks for that!

...and that would mean, there are 'improvements' made from different generations of lenses. It's a bit like cars...

Could I say that a 70-200 (1st version) has undergone the same few iterations of improvements since it was launched in 2003?
I.e; Y2003 batch is different from Y2008 batch?

Usually not for the optical design because it's tricky especially for zoom lenses. There may be minor changed in the mechanical design to lower cost or make things more reliable but not likely for optical design once it's locked down.

 

[Clown]

I don't think the MTF chart give you consistency information leh... It's basically a plot of contrast for sagittal and meridional lines at 10lpmm and 30lpmm versus the distance of the image from the centre. So at the x-axis, at 0, it means the centre, at 15, it means the corner for DX and at 21.5, it's the extreme corner for FX.

Like I mentioned in another posting, you should look at the worse case of the S and M at each resolution, doesn't make sense if concentric circles are sharp and radial lines are blur, right? In that aspect, the newer lens is sharper overall, except at 200mm where the old lens would perform marginally better (0.7 vs 0.6) than the new one over DX but the new lens beats the old one over FX.

yes i can read mtf charts very well thank you.

 

[froisnaidu]

hmm..so what's gonna happend to the older version now?discontinued?its still up on the site though

 

[lsisaxon]

Thanks lsisaxon for the comments. You seem to be really knowledgeable (from reading ur posts over a period of time

Is the improvement really that great btw? ...how much sharper is an improvement of 0.1 on that scale? (is it a linear scale..i.e; 10% improvement?)

On the tele side, it seems that there is very slight improvement if not softer on the edges. (which where most likely this lens will be used) while most of the improvement seems to be on the wide side (70mm).

Of course, to be fair to this new lens...we are just looking at MTF charts so far.
We still have to see how it fares in real life and on colours, bokeh, flaring, CA, etc.

There is a huge corner improvement at 200mm for the new lens! For the same resolution, the old lens is limited by it's meridional transfer function. You need to collectively look at the S and M (solid and dashed) traces for the same resolution to determine how well the lens can resolve that resolution because in real life, an object is going to have lines in arbitrary angles, not just vertical and horizontal, and it doesn't make sense to resolve vertical lines very well while the horizontal ones are blurred.

As far as aberration is concerned, as long as the S and M traces are close together, it suggests that aberraion is under control. The only question now is the bokeh.. MTF chart tell us how good the lens is when in focus, but no information when it's out of focus. ;p

 

[lsisaxon]

yes i can read mtf charts very well thank you.

That's why I was wondering......why you mentioned consistency...:dunno:

 

[lsisaxon]

basically they're using larger elements to increase the image circle to solve the supposedly vignetting problem
the increased surface area of the new elements need a bit more shape adjustments to counter the loss of sharpness in the corners.

Don't think they are using aspherical elements on this one, so it's going to be tricky.. 21 elements is a lot of degree of freedom in the simulations! *faint*

 

[lamergod]

Hopefully the price of 80-200 two touch will drop to my price range.
Praying hard

 

[rahul]

Hoping for some bargains on older 70-200 lenses being available.
There are lots of them out there and anyone using FX MUST have this new version