Nikkor 200 mm F2.0 AF-S VR lens

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by scene through a lens, Apr 11, 2007.

  1. Hi, I'm looking to purchase the above mentioned lense, does anybody have a good
    idea where I can pick this up the cheapest, it normally retials in the UK for
    ?2400, in US for ?2000, was hoping to get a better deal. Thanks for your help
     
  2. Robert White has the lens for 2,200 pounds:


    http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/nikon.htm#Label06


    In the U.S., the 200mm f/2.0 retails in the U.S. for $4,000:


    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=Search&A=details&Q=&sku=337510&is=USA&addedTroughType=search
     
  3. Those prices you've obtained for that lens are pretty darn good. You won't find that lens
    anywhere near that $2,000 US price, unless it's used.
     
  4. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    I think that ? shown with the price is the British Pound. The current exchange rate is almost US$2 per Pound.
     
  5. RW prices don't include VAT.
     
  6. Thanks for the info, I put the pound sign in seems it wasn't carried over. US price was 2000 UK pounds. I saw a second hand one on EBay but seller is looking for 2300 K pounds which is steep for SH.
     
  7. I own a Nikon 200/2 AI manual focus lens and while it is the sharpest lens I have ever owned and I would not want to be without it, I bought it used for only $600 USD so it was not too hard to justify. My primary fast telephoto lenses have always been a 300/2.8 or 400/2.8. I am just curious why you specifically want the 200/2 rather than the similarly priced 300/2.8 for example.


    I generally use a Nikon 400/2.8 AIS for outdoor sports and a 200/2 for indoor sports. By the way my 200/2 is sharper than my 400/2.8 and sharper than the Canon FD 300/2.8 L that I had. Sharper by a lot, not just a bit. So if you're looking for a sharp, fast indoor lens you can't go wrong with the 200/2. Good luck.
     
  8. Sorry that this response is not related to the main post but it is rare that someone comments on the 200mm f2 ai/ais lens. John, I use the same combination of lenses; 400mm f2.8 ais and 200mm f2 ais. I agree with you about the 200mm performance. However, I have been unhappy with the 200mm's performance using the 2x converters; TC301 and TC-20E (modified). In fact, I would describe the 200mm results using the 2x converter on my F5 and D200 as "unusable".
     
  9. If you can consider this a consolation, I've had (and reported) exactly the same findings with my 200/2 AIS. This is a lens that doesn't like TCs. The only exception I've found so far is the elusive TC14C.

    These days, I'm only using the 200/2 VR and my 200/2 AIS is collecting dust. The AIS performs less satisfactory on the current DSLRs.
     
  10. sucks to be Bjorn. . . 2, 200 f/2's . . . .
     
  11. I try to have backups. So for lenses important to me and my work, I strive to have at least two samples (this applies to 200/2, 300/2.8, UV-Nikkor 105, EL-Nikkor 63/3.5, 400/500/105/50 mm lenses etc. etc.). It's the same underlying rationale as having at least 2 camera bodies of a certain kind.
     
  12. I have always preferred cropping from a 1.4x converter than using a 2x. The 1.4x are just that much better, and of course 1 stop faster can also help make the shot either with slower film or a lower ISO setting. I have a pretty bad TC-14B which I will hopefully replace by the summer. Even considering how bad it is I have found using it to be worthwhile with the 200/2. This past weekend I did some comparison shots of indoor swimming with and without the converter but have not evaluated them yet. If my opinion changes I will post it.


    The TC-14C has shown up on eBay a couple of times recently but I just can't justify the $600 to $1000 price tag at this time. Seems to me a 300/2.8 at the same price might be more beneficial, but of course the 14C would save space. I think Bjorn says the 200/2 and 14C beat the 300/2.8. I'll have to dig through my test shots and see how my combo does against the FD 300/2.8 L.
     

Share This Page