Will you buy a AFS 70-200m f4 VR if Nikon launch one?

[ZerocoolAstra]

70-200 f/4 VR for around the price of 70-300 f/4-5.6 VR ??


Mmmmmmmm ;p
(if only....)

 

[kriegsketten]

70-200 f/4 VR for around the price of 70-300 f/4-5.6 VR ??


Mmmmmmmm ;p
(if only....)

Now that's a dream coming true... Like you've said, if only... I'd immediately not hesitate and swoop up a copy!! Then you'll see a CONTAINER load of 70-300VRs at the BnS at massively reduced prices (still a good thing for those who's eyeing on that lens!).

Okay, better wake up and snap out of it... :bsmilie:

 

[luckyorange]

If got money sure buy, no money llst lo

 

[ZerocoolAstra]

Now that's a dream coming true... Like you've said, if only... I'd immediately not hesitate and swoop up a copy!! Then you'll see a CONTAINER load of 70-300VRs at the BnS at massively reduced prices (still a good thing for those who's eyeing on that lens!).

Okay, better wake up and snap out of it... :bsmilie:

Go play with your bamboo... leave the scraps for us poor folks!

Is there any truth to the 'rumours' of a 70-200 f/4 VR though?

 

[giantcanopy]

Is there any truth to the 'rumours' of a 70-200 f/4 VR though?

Maybe TS doing market survey for Nikon. Better click the first option

 

[ZerocoolAstra]

Maybe TS doing market survey for Nikon. Better click the first option

I did :angel:

 

[Nubzz]

70-200 f4... that is what nikon is lacking..

If this lens really come out (albeit with a good pricing), i will be hard-choiced to choose between the 70-300 and this. :bsmilie:

 

[kriegsketten]

Well, I also added my vote for the f/4 model.. Looks like constant f/4 is an even greater charmer than variable f/4-5.6 huh?

 

[ZerocoolAstra]

Well, I also added my vote for the f/4 model.. Looks like constant f/4 is an even greater charmer than variable f/4-5.6 huh?

I guess the 70-300 F/4-5.6 still has a bit of a 'budget lens' feel to it somehow.
All things considered, if really 70-200 f/4 VR materializes, it will likely be priced on par with Canon's 70-200 f/4 IS.
For my needs, probably the 70-300VR makes more economical sense then...

 

[niccon2]

wow, the demand is on par with f2.8. nikon should really considering marketing this lens but of course, a wider survey sampling is required for better accuracy.

 

[lamergod]

Yes! if is a good quality lens, why not? welcome to my collection.

yup, also the lack of vr do have some constraint on low light hand held condition usage.

I have no idea what is your definition of light. But my surroundings have all been 300 F2.8 and 70-200 F2.8 so I consider the 80-200 really light. I've not seen the Canon F4 but from the pictures I see, it seems pretty similar with the 80-200, maybe a bit heavier since it's metal built.

VR is something like 2 stops of shutter yeah? Can't remember since I rarely follow gears now. No idea what's Nikon's latest camera. Since from F4 to 2.8 it's somewhere around 2 stops why would you still need VR? And you get better bokeh.

 

[Cowseye]

The latest vr2 gives 4 stops (tested 3.7 stops for 70-200mm vr2) advantage. And F/4 to F/2.8 is one stop.

 

[niccon2]

Since from F4 to 2.8 it's somewhere around 2 stops why would you still need VR? And you get better bokeh.

I sometimes shot indoor using 85mm f1.8 and the speed is about 1/20-30 if using D700 or better body still can get away with noise at higher iso but using something like my d90, this noise is terrible thus f2.8 in my opinion is not enough and vr will be handy for those who shot in low light without flash and cropped sensor.

 

[lamergod]

The latest vr2 gives 4 stops (tested 3.7 stops for 70-200mm vr2) advantage. And F/4 to F/2.8 is one stop.

Wow what technical advancement. Need to catch up with following gears already.

 

[tehzeh]

I have no idea what is your definition of light. But my surroundings have all been 300 F2.8 and 70-200 F2.8 so I consider the 80-200 really light. I've not seen the Canon F4 but from the pictures I see, it seems pretty similar with the 80-200, maybe a bit heavier since it's metal built.

Canon's f/4 IS is much much lighter than Nikon's 80-200. It balances damn well with the 500D when compared to an 80-200 with a D90.

 

[nikonriana]

Well... I bet there'll be plenty users... It's like what canon system did.. U throw in a lighter F4 Vr and non Vr and cheaper and even cheaper price. Smaller and lighter.. For users that doesn't cover much indoor and night events.. F4 non Vr is plenty wide and produce good DOF pictures already... With VR it still works plenty good with a SB900... If it's alot lighter and smaller.. I'd pick a 70-200 VR I or VR II then a F2.8 VR II.. Long run.. Heavy sia..

 

[aloks]

Hi
I will certainly buy , if it is 70-300 (4) VR lens.

Thanks
Alok