Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VR or VR II

[stevenseelig]

<p>Done with a D700 body.. I should add</p>

[rashed]

<p>My dear Friend Steven, I went to see your portifilo and enjoyed seeing your personnel photograph with that so pleasant smile , please my friend keep smilling .<br>

I used my 85MM F2.8 several times while in Thailand this time and it was so good and so sharp, may be I failed to see the vegenting things but the sharpness is very amazing.<br>

Last year I was in Thailand with a Canon system, I had the 70-200MM F2.8, sharpness wise it was very impressive colors wise it was not, main while I had the Sigma 70-200MM F2.8, for more than a year and never been pleased with another lens of its range as I did with it, every thing out of that lens is what any user would dream to have.<br>

I just feel so sorry that I one hand got rid of my canon system and in another hand also sold all of my Sigma lenses , specially the 70-200MM F2.8 HSM and the 300MM F2.8 HSM , the second which I did not even shoot 10 images with it .</p>

<p>I can not understand still and as I have mentioned before , why nikon adding both the 70-200mm vr2 and the 300mm vr2 , to me they have serious problem with their lenses and I think the HSM ( High Speed Motor ) is more better than the VR, solonid system which some times under certain condition have no effect at all.</p>

<p>Thank you my friend, please except my best regards for you and yours for the new year.</p>

[Uhooru]

<p>"However, Version 1 is not nearly as sharp as some poeple put it. I have had one for 4, 5 years now and it is certainly sharp enough, but if you do an A/B comparison against a fixed 200mm/f2 or 300mm/f2.8 AF-S wide open, the difference in sharpness is quite noticeable."<br>

I don't know Shun. The Version 1 is quite sharp enough because of its great background effect at open apertures make subjects "pop". Is it clinically as sharp as version 2 or some other fixed lens? Apparently not. However, I have a 24-70, and its hyper sharp, but I'm not convinced I like the look of the photos any better than the 70-200. I get better color rendition and a more "film" like photo with the 70-200 Version 1 and it looks pretty damn sharp to me. I'm not convinced I really like the look of the the new Nano lenses. They gain something, but they also seem to lose something too. A little too clinical maybe.<br>

But, if the OP is concerned about vignetting and even more sharpness maybe he should rent 1 of each and see what pictures he likes better. Isn't that what really counts at the end of the day? </p>

<p> </p>

[jose_angel]

<p>I have been using the VRII extensively for the last four days... with a much better impression.</p>

<p>I find it to be very sharp, along the whole range, specially at closer distances, something so satisfying to me. I find it to be even sharper than my 105VR at medium distances (I mean 6-10 feet). (<em>To those who have read my previous post, I`m using another unit!).</em></p>

<p>On my D700, the AF works astoundingly good, and the VR system is a wonder. I did some indoor test shots and got some better focused shots using AF than with Live View!. By the way, the focus barrel is smoother and better designed than the one on the Micro 105VR (=easier to focus manually). Outdoors, shooting different subjects, the only unsharp pics I`ve got were due to a wrong focus technique + extremely shallow DoF at closer distances and/or longer settings.</p>

<p>In the chapter of drawbacks, I`d say the shortening of the focal lenght at smaller focus distances could be the bigger one. The lens is a wonder at close distances, but someone could expect to have more reach under e.g., 20feet. This could be the price to pay for such good performance. Another one could be background bokeh... I`ve seen some non-beautiful background effects in any of my pics, but nothing to be surprised at all. But probably my biggest complain is that round-shaped hood that cannot let the lens to stand up over a flat surface when switching lenses.</p>

<p>I don`t have a VR1 to compare, I cannot say how good it is. Anyway, I suspect that on an IF lens with such amount of elements, sample variation could be an issue.</p>

[rashed]

<p>I been running behind this un sharpness factors on my lenses for a long time, tonight I been taken with a friend of mine to the Chornise of Doha, he ordered me a cap of Karak tea and he told me that he is going to show me something he like me to look at carefully.<br>

He lefted his D3X from the back seat and went to the menu, the first row on the left and then to the camera setting and then to then he showen me the sharpness gauge, he told me that you see it now on sharp but if I switch the camera to the manufacturer setting this gauge go down to bellow 0, and he did one shot while tha camera been laid at the dash board carefully and he shot the car lights, going and coming on low shutter speed, there was still some movement because of the cars passing through.<br>

The image he did shoot was very sharp and crispy, no where like all of my images I have captured with this camera and specially with the 70-200MM F2.8 VR-1 or the 300MM F2.8 VR-1, the different to the best was so massive.<br>

After he dropped me back home, I have checked the menu of my camera and found that gauge also as he said on bellow 0 so I increased it to maximum and I will try this setting tomorrow.<br>

This shows that the D3X command can give soft sharpness for possible shooting some specail subjects and also very sharp images for some other subjects, if this is the case , all of my lenses I prizum would act like soft focus lenses for portrait work and so sharp lenses for landscape and so on.</p>

<p>I will test tomorrow and show the result.</p>

 

[tore_helming]

<p>One thing almost all people seems to forget to mention is that the new VRII is more light sensitive than the VRI. The old one was not really f2.8 at 200 mm but the new one seems more true to that aperture. In summary: VRII requires 1/6 -1/3 EV less light than the VRI.</p>

[Uhooru]

<p>Not really 2.8? What is it? Please explain. Not heard that before. Isn't it a fixed aperture lens? Or is it that the VRII can lock on with 1/6 - 1/3 stop of light at 200mm?. </p>