I hate to ask/post, but I have the 70-200/2.8 VRI on its way. Mistake??

birdman

Impulsively bought the older 2.8VRI but got a phenomenal deal. One of my friends on here (not saying any names) convinced me to go with at least
one (1) F/2.8 ZOOM. I have shot with his newer 2.8 VRII -- and while very sharp and nice -- it's a beast. Just like this VRI will be when it arrives in a few days. Has anyone directly compared the newest 70-200/4.0 VRIII to either of these lenses? Or does anyone own the newest zoom?

I held it at the store the other days and it was light....but much cheaper built than its F/2.8 big brothers. I will either keep the VRI when it arrives, resell and buy the 4.0 VRIII, or bite the bullet and get the granddaddy of them all (2.8 VRII). I'm just looking at shooting with TCs and how bad image would degrade on all 3 70-200mm lenses. Let me know if you have any questions. And any feedback is greatly appreciated.
0

spraynpray

I'm sure this topic was covered on the old forum just before the changeover so a search should find it, BUT I seem to recall that the concensus was that if you could get the old f2.8 at a bargain price you should get it. There are differences in performance but they aren't earth shattering. The f4 may suit you depending on your preferred genres, others will give their opinions shortly.

sevencrossing

I'm sure this topic was covered on the old forum .

yes it is here

http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=4218

haroldp

I have a good sample of the 2.8 VRI and am keeping it.

I never noticed any of it's supposed problems until it became a web discussion point, and thety do not matter for my use of this lens.

The primary difference between the two generations is at wide openings in the edges / corners, and for my usage of this lens, the likelihood of anything in the edges / corners being in the plane of focus is remote.

... H

Msmoto

From the old thread:
One more rationalizations...something I am an expert at doing...:-)
The 70-200 is a range which can be used so much. This lens can take in all the shots we do with 85f/1.8's, 100 f/2'2, 135 f/2's adn of course 200mm. In addition, if one wants more range the VRII is excellent with the TC-20EIII. So, the VRII is IMO the way to go and forego any of the others until later.

Now, obviously, in low light, one will need those other fast lenses, but for 90% of the time, shooting at f/2.8 is quite adequate.

For the really absurd, this can save about $6,000 because you can ad that TC-20EIII and for less than $3,000 have 400mm f/5.6. Ha, ha, ha. So, this is what to say, "Honey, I saved us $6,000 today.".......

All this lens stuff is about how much we want to spend. Almost all the photos I do with the big lens can be done for as little of 10% of the price. And, if one can find a 70-200mm f/2.8 VRI for an exceptional deal, and I mean for less than $1200 USD, then this is obviously the way to go. The VRII is on sale for $2100 USD at Adorama, so a savings of $900 would allow the purchase of the new Sigma 35mm f/1.4.....Yes!

I can really rationalize well...

ChromiumPrime

The VRI is a truly excellent lens and if you can handle it's weight and size then why even bother with any of its other variations?

Btw are you planning on using the lens on FX or DX?

obajoba

Btw are you planning on using the lens on FX or DX?

That's probably the first question that should be asked.

I have the "VRI" version that I picked up for ~$1500 late last summer in excellent (barely used) condition. I have noticed as of late that it isn't as sharp, even in the center, as some of the photos I've seen from others with the same model. I think that if you picked it up for <$1300, and intend to shoot anything that requires the extra stop, you will appreciate every penny you spent to purchase it... even more so if you are shooting on DX.

birdman

Thanks guys. I realize that I wrote this post half-asleep last night. Yikes!! I bought it for $1,250, with all paperwork from original owner. Lens was purchased from B & H and supposedly "hand picked" in the NYC store. I'll be using it on the D800, but also will be purchasing a used D300 or other DX in the future for extra reach. I've tried the DX crop mode on the D800, and frankly can't get used to composing the image within the alloted space in theviewfinder. It works in a pinch, though (and framerate is pretty good). I guess every zoom is a compromise to some extent. For example, my 24-120/4.0 vignettes noticeably, and is not superbly sharp in the corners wide open.

Golf007sd

@birdman...great job in getting the 70-200 2.8 VRI. You are going to love that lens...much like the 85 1.8G. Now don't worry about the differences between the VRI & VRII. Lets hookup and have some fun (I'm the friend he was hinting at :P)

ChromiumPrime

For example, my 24-120/4.0 vignettes noticeably, and is not superbly sharp in the corners wide open.

I've had the VRI before but used it on DX... I've also never been a pixel peeper so even on FX I probably wouldn't have noticed the corner issues. But if you're still worried vignetting and corner sharpness will be an issue then the only thing I can say is it's probably all relative. Corner degradation on the VRI most likely won't be anywhere near that of the 24-120.

There is always a compromise of some sort with these kind of things.

VRI: Corner performance, size, weight
VRII: Focus breathing, size, weight, price
VRIII: f/4, construction, no tripod foot

If I was buying a 70-200 right now, I'd go with either VRI or VRIII and if I found one for the same price you did then it's the VRI for sure.

Enjoy your lens and make sure you post some photos with it! >-

haroldp

DX does not give 'extra reach' if lens and position are equal, it simply crops.

The D800 gives you 15 mp in a DX crop where the D300 is 12mp. The D800 sensor is also 2 generations newer, and better than the D300 on a pixel for pixel basis.

The D800 autofocus is much better since it's computer is more powerful.

I own use both. (and D700 and D3x)

I have one of the buttons ( DOF preview ) on my D800e programmed to switch between FX and DX crop.

Since I also use Leica's, I am used to composing inside a frame box in the finder. I find being able to see what is approaching outside the frame to be an advantage in some circumstances, particularly sports or wildlife.

Regards ... H

Ade

I still use the older 80-200 AFS and it is tack sharp with the D800e. No reason for me to upgrade. Your new VRI is already better, with similar optical performance but with VR and improved bokeh. I don't think the VRII is $800 better, other than having the "newest and greatest".

Gitzo

@ Birdman..........I'll stay out of the fray over the new lens, but you also mentioned..... "but also will be purchasing a used D300 or other DX in the future for extra reach."

I you go that route, by all means, don't buy the 300; buy the 300s; at this point in time, very little if any difference in cost, and the 300s has more improvements than many people are aware of; the only other DX body to compare with is the new D 7100, and you won't be getting any "super deals" on it any time soon.
I just recently bought a copy of David Busch's guides for the D-300s and I have been reading it from cover to cover; ( the thing is 2 inches thick !) I just ran across something in it today that I was completely unaware of; I
have learned so many things since I've had this book, I'm thinking anyone who owns any Nikon body would benefit from it; much more than just a guide for a particular camera; the author is so knowledgeable about all aspects of photography, he imparts a wealth of knowledge while covering this specific camera.

It's very difficult comparing "camera A to camera B" on here, because there will ALWAYS be people who own both cameras reading your every word, and if you say anything is "superior" in either camera, you will be hearing shortly from owners of the other camera. I don't think there are any two people on this whole forum who have the exact same "needs", or who can "justify" having the exact sum or $$$ tied up in camera equipment.

tektrader

I bought a brand new 70-200 VR1 12 months ago from a retailer for $1000. The lens is the best lens I have in my bag. I just cant imagine the VR 2 being much better. I expect mine was one of the last manuafactured and if these lenses did have problems, most where ironed out long before I got mine.

I love this lens. Dont regret buying yours for a second.

Swame_sp

+1 to Tektrader....

I could not justify putting in 2K for VR2, so bought a used VR1 and I'm keeping it.

It's the best lens that I have bought to date. It;s worth every penny.
No regrets at all.

birdman

@birdman...great job in getting the 70-200 2.8 VRI. You are going to love that lens...much like the 85 1.8G. Now don't worry about the differences between the VRI & VRII. Lets hookup and have some fun (I'm the friend he was hinting at :P)

No Golf007, it wasn't you I was referring to at all. HAHA. Thanks for the replies, all of you. I knew the VRI was a great lens, but I wasn't expecting such enthusiastic responses. Can't wait.

framer

Let me say the 70 - 200 f2.8 vr1 is my goto for portraits on FX.

Perfect for fast sports when in close.

Very useful at weddings.

framer