Missing prime 200mm AFS 2.8 w/VR

framer

If I could get a high performance 200mm f/2.8 VR prime with fast AF but smaller than the f2. Sure we have the 70 - 200 but a smaller, lighter and higher performance 200 would fill a want for me. With a performance level of the new 300/4 is what I asking about.

framer

starralazn

Even though the 70-200 has its short comings at 200, i think Nikon would find it difficult to market a 200mm 2.8, because it would not really be that different than the 70-200 at 200mm (on paper at least).
also, if the 200mm f4 micro nikkor is any indication (i know its a micro lens but still), this theoretical 200mm would probably still be around the 1800-2000$ range.

heartyfisher

There is sigma 180 F2.8 OS macro prime that I was thinking of getting a while ago.. Looks really nice ..

manhattanboy

I really like the canon 200 2.8 prime. Much smaller and lighter and cheaper than the 2.8 zoom. Nikon has the 300pf which is better IMHO. Nonetheless the pf prime is expensive and if they could make a good 200 prime under a grand I would probably buy it if it was of similar size as the canon.

framer

I would not mind a $1500+ price range. Like I said smaller, lighter, super fast AFs motor like the new 300/4 pf. I love the quality and performance of the 200/2 vr but I want a much smaller lighter package but with close to same performance.

framer

framer

AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II
$2,099.95

3.4 in. (87 mm) x 8.1 in. (205.5 mm)
54.3 oz. (1540 g)


AF-S NIKKOR 200mm f/2G ED VR II
$5,699.95

4.9 in. (124 mm) x 8.0 in. (203 mm)
102.4 oz. (2,900 g)


AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/4E PF ED VR
$1,999.95

3.5 in. (89 mm) x 5.8 in. (147.5 mm)
26.6 oz. (755 g)


The 300 PF is 1/4 the weight of the 200/2 and 1/2 the weight of the 70-200, it is also 2+ inches shorter than both of the other lenses. If they could get the length down to 5 inches I would find a way to pay for it. I might be dreaming of the $1500 but I would consider a higher price if the performance was there.

framer

Vipmediastar_JZ

I like your idea. I'm a fan of shooting at 200mm and 300mm. The 300mmPF is a very nice lens especially in the weight department. I'm enjoying it very much. Right now my daily bag has 50mm and the 300mm. I could add 35mm but I like this daily combo.

jan

A PF version of a 200 mm f2.8 would be interesting, but we have to be realistic that Nikon would not make it professional level build quality like the 200 mm f2. In 2016 I would expect Nikon to add fluorite lenses to the professional grade 300 mm f2.8 and 200 mm f2, which should help reduce the mass of the lens.

Nikoniser

I have the Sigma 180mm f2.8, it is a fantastic lens - optically without flaws, very sharp wide open at f2.8 ( much sharper than my 105mm Nikon ), quick to focus, goes all the way to 1:1 macro. Bokeh and rendering is flawless.

If I have a complaint it is that the tracking autofocus is not quite as good as my 24-70 - although the 24-70 has a much easier job to do.

And I think the stabilisation is not quite as good as Nikons, 3 stops not 4.

Very much one of my favourite lenses, much better than the 70-200 and gives a unique look to pictures.

framer

I spent a hour looking at the 70-200 f4 today at the local camera store. IMHO the VR seemed to have issues. I got nice clean shoots with the VR off but could not get a sharp image in the center with VR on. It strangely had sharper corners than the center with VR on. I past. They did not have the Sigma 180 for me to try.

I'll try another sample when I can find it, I hope I had a bad lens.

framer

manhattanboy

I spent a hour looking at the 70-200 f4 today at the local camera store. IMHO the VR seemed to have issues. I got nice clean shoots with the VR off but could not get a sharp image in the center with VR on. It strangely had sharper corners than the center with VR on. I past. They did not have the Sigma 180 for me to try.

I'll try another sample when I can find it, I hope I had a bad lens.

framer

The Sigma is just waaaaaaaaaaaay too big for what it is. Look at this comparison:
Canon versus Sigma versus Nikon

I want something the size of the Canon 2.8 prime. I have the Nikon 70-200 f4 and it is a nice general purpose shooting lens. Not as sharp as the old 300 f4 or the new one, but it is not as burdensome as a 2.8 zoom.

spraynpray

I spent a hour looking at the 70-200 f4 today at the local camera store. IMHO the VR seemed to have issues. I got nice clean shoots with the VR off but could not get a sharp image in the center with VR on. It strangely had sharper corners than the center with VR on. I past. They did not have the Sigma 180 for me to try.

I'll try another sample when I can find it, I hope I had a bad lens.

framer

I reckon that copy had been dropped because the 70-200 f4 is known to be a very sharp zoom. Shop demo gear is untrustworthy for forming an opinion.

Nikoniser

RE - the Canon 200mm 2.8 :

Quote from Lens Tips review : http://www.lenstip.com/355.4-Lens_review-Sigma_180_mm_f_2.8_APO_Macro_EX_DG_OS_HSM__Image_resolution.html


" On the edge of the frame the situation is equally good. The Sigma 2.8/180 OS on the edge of the APS-C/DX sensor can be sharper than some ‘primes’ in the frame centre. What’s more, the more demanding edge of full frame fares just slightly worse. The image you can get there is of a very high quality even at the maximum relative aperture!

In order to show you how good the Sigma is it would be enough to write that practically at every aperture and across the whole frame the lens is better than the Canon EF 200 mm f/2.8L USM II, so praised and liked by many users. Personally I haven’t tested such a sharp full frame instrument for a long time – let this sentence substitute a summary here!

The weight is worth it, as the lens works as a macro lens, a sports lens, a wildlife lens, and a Portrait lens, replacing my 70-200, and my 105mm and my 300mm f4. The canon is also very limited as max reproduction ratio is just 0.16 at 1.5 meters, which means for headshots you are constantly flirting with the minimum focus distance. Honestly, I have not been this in love with a third party lens ever, it beats the closest Nikon competitor the 105mm f2.8 VR ( which I also own ) in every category.

manhattanboy

@Nikoniser I don't doubt the Sigma is a sharp lens, and am glad you are finding good use for it. The point is I want something small and light; to be fair the 200 2.8 Canon is not as sharp as the image stabilized Canon 70-200 2.8 II zoom, but anyone shooting primarily at the long end may actually prefer the prime if given the choice because of size/weight/price mix. When @Costalconn switched to Canon, this was one of the lenses he picked up, and he loves it from what I can tell.

If Canon could do this with a lens costing less than a $1000 and a design that is more than a decade old, why can't other companies produce something similar or sharper while maintaining the light weight and small size? This is what I want Nikon to do.

BVS

I want something the size of the Canon 2.8 prime.

The Nikon equivalent lens is the 180mm f/2.8D. Same age as Canon 200 f/2.8, same weight, similar price, similar focal length. Whether it's as good as the Canon lens or not is another matter.

framer

OK! I just bought a used nikon 70-200 f/2.8g vr2 without anything no foot, no case, no caps, no hood, free 2 day shipping. Guaranteed 14 day return if I don't like it for any reason my dime.

I hope it shoots nice.

framer

Coastalconn

@manhattanboy I do love the Canon 200 prime. I picked up a used one from the bay for 310 shipped. Of course I use it for my close up hawk lens and it does not disappoint. The focus speed and accuracy is awesome and it is probably on of the sharpest lenses I have shot with. One of the few things that keeps me from going back to Nikon.. Along with the 1d4 I got for $450

framer

I got this today and so far It looks like a keeper. It seems fast, dead on focus and the VR2 works great. This is so much better than the new 70-200 f/4 that I checked out. It cost less than that f/4 would have. I'll beat on it for a couple more days but I think it just what I've been needing for the D810.

framer

heartyfisher

Sounds like a great deal @framer ! Have fun wrestling it to the ground !! yee har! :-)

framer

I win !!! I wish I could have gotten a small, fast 2.8 size 200 but it doesn't exist. Having finally got my hands on the 70-200 2.8 vr2 I can say I really like it.

This sample is even focused left to right and top to bottom. Operation is smooth and quite. The only thing wrong is a couple of light, light external body scratches and no foot or caps. I had the caps, hood and Kirk foot just purchased on fleabay for ~$60.00.

framer