70-200 2.8E

heartyfisher

Vipmediastar_JZ said:

does the focus breathing affect DOF? or bokeh? I dont remember why I cared once i found out the technical part of focus breathing but i know the f4 didn't have it and besides the weight it is one reason I enjoy it more. I like to shoot 200-300mm wide open.

Yeah .. especially the 70-200 F2.8... because at close distances the focal length is shorter the DOF is also wider. In fact the 70-200 F4, which doesnt focus breath, at close distances produce thinner DOF at "200mm" compared to the F2.8.

And I still think the 2 "focus breathing" described, sounds exactly the same ... :-)

WestEndFoto

I think reasonable people can disagree on this.

Golf007sd

Focus breathing has never been an issue for me on any of my lenses. As for the new 70-200, if I did not own one I would buy the new one. The performance of my 70-200 2.8 VR II has been outstanding...Im sure the new one will be even better.

vtc2002

Focal length breathing occurs when you have your focal length set at a specific length and when you press the shutter release button half way to engage auto focus the focal length changes slightly. If you use manual focus the focal length would not change when you focus on the subject. This is different from focus breathing in that whether you are in manual or auto focus mode the effective focal length is different depending on how close or far away you are from the subject. Both are very minor issues that very rarely have any impact at the end of the day in my opinion.

tc88

If I buy a 70-200, I expect 200 to be covered, infinite focus or close focus.

Here is an analogy. If ones buys a new 70-200 and the store sends one with dings and internal dust. Are you going to accept it or not? Hey, those shouldn’t affect the pictures so shouldn’t be a problem.

Sports

vtc2002 said:

This is different from focus breathing in that whether you are in manual or auto focus mode the effective focal length is different depending on how close or far away you are from the subject.

The focal length is directly linked to the field of view, I suppose, and the field of view follows straight lines at a certain angle, and doesn't change depending on the distance. When you still see a change, it's because the FOCUS distance changes, so it IS the same issue afterall, I would say.
It's not a mysterious, unexplainable curse of the lens, it's a property of some optical designs, and the 70-200 VR2 is probably one of the "worst", but as part of the big "zoom lens compromise", I'm sure relaxing on focus breathing enabled Nikon to improve (or simplify) some other properties.
The 3D-rendering/micro-contrast stuff as discussed on a different thread, THAT's a much tougher nut to crack. That could be pure magic :-)

vtc2002

The focal length may change in both scenarios so they are the same in that regards but the path or how they are changed is different. I agree @Ironheart that they are two sides of the same coin. Whether either issue is a problem is up to the person using the lens.
@Sports I do agree with you concerning what compromises Nikon made in creating the VRII and what compromises were made in the new lens. Time will tell.

retread

The VRII is working so well that I don't see any reason to upgrade at this time. If I did not already have the VRII I would go for the new one.

WestEndFoto

Since I don't have a 70-200 from any generation, I will go for the new one.

Photobug

Golf007sd said:

Focus breathing has never been an issue for me on any of my lenses. As for the new 70-200, if I did not own one I would buy the new one. The performance of my 70-200 2.8 VR II has been outstanding...Im sure the new one will be even better.

Well old friend, good to see you leaving a message. Hope your feeling well.

Back on point, the performance of my 70-200 2.8 VR mirrors your comments. Works great on my D7100 and D750. Been too busy to pull more pictures from vacation to Flickr so I can post here.

I can't see upgrading from the VR to the new one at that cost.

Msmoto

As one who looks at MTF charts, it appears the new lens is a bit less crisp wide...but the tele performance is much better, especially as one moves away from the center. And, this is where i use the current model, primarily at the long end.

$2800 vs. $2100....I like my old version just fine.

heartyfisher

The MTF does look really nice.. looks to me like it would be really quite good even with TC20 ie. 400mm F5.6. !!

LOL! anyone ever stack TCs eg TC14+TC20 !!

Photobug

Msmoto said:

As one who looks at MTF charts, it appears the new lens is a bit less crisp wide...but the tele performance is much better, especially as one moves away from the center. And, this is where i use the current model, primarily at the long end.

$2800 vs. $2100....I like my old version just fine.

Thanks for the MTF summary. Got to agree with you on the cost. Can't justify the delta. I primary use it in the mid range to long end except I noticed in the Teton NP I used the short end more than expected.

heartyfisher

From looking at the Max reproduction ratio figures it does look to me like the new E lense has mostly fixed the focus breathing !! :-)

framer

What do other think of the reversed focus zoom rings? After so many years being one way, I'm not sure if I welcome that feature.

With the newest autofocus abilities, tweaking focus when shooting fast things is not primary but zooming is. I tend to hold the lens with my hand under the back of the lens with my elbow locked and in my chest. Like offhand target shooting.

framer

pictureted

framer said:

What do other think of the reversed focus zoom rings? After so many years being one way, I'm not sure if I welcome that feature.

With the newest autofocus abilities, tweaking focus when shooting fast things is not primary but zooming is. I tend to hold the lens with my hand under the back of the lens with my elbow locked and in my chest. Like offhand target shooting.

framer

I agree.

I was tempted briefly by this new lens as a supplement to my 70-200/4 for occasional sports shooting (new grandchildren), but don't like reversing the zoom/focus from the f4, I'll just up the ISO and worry less about subject isolation. Save enough for a D810 upgrade.

heartyfisher

Had a peep at the 70-200 F4 MTF too on the main blog compared to the new 70-200E and that ol' F4 is no slouch.. beats the new one .. but I guess its F4 vs F2.8 so there is that .. still very impressive.. but I already know that :-)

WestEndFoto

I would want to see the 2.8's MTF at f/4.0 for an apples to apples comparison, but the standard MTF charts do not show that.

heartyfisher

I am sure Nasim from photography life will do a good review job on it.. and even stack TCs on it :-)

dissent

Nasim seemed unhappy that they switched positions of the focus and zoom rings. More to come in a full review.

Photobug

heartyfisher said:

I am sure Nasim from photography life will do a good review job on it.. and even stack TCs on it :-)

I hope we see that review soon. Looking forward to it.

dissent said:

Nasim seemed unhappy that they switched positions of the focus and zoom rings. More to come in a full review.

Right now that bothers me that they switched the focus and zoom collar around. Got to have consistency "lens-to-lens". You don't' want to have to think when shooting fast.

DenverShooter

Perhaps reversing the focus and zoom rings let them fix the focus breathing problem??

Ducking and running for the exit.

Denver Shooter

MegapixelSchnitzel

Opinions, people: does this lens throw enough resolution to take full advantage of a 40+ MP sensor?

Ironheart

Looking at the MTF, hell yes.

NSXTypeR

Can anyone speculate on Nikon's reason for switching the zoom and focus rings?

They normally don't do that willy nilly.