chuck

I understand some arca Swiss compatible QR systems, such as sirui, will fit into a arca Swiss QR clamp, but will not engage the safety detent pin. This seems dangerous to me, because it seems if you forget to tighten the clamp, and the ball head, and the ball head flops forward, the plate and whatever is attached can slide out. Am I right? So are Kirk and arcatech plates fully compatible with arca Swiss QR clamps in the sense that they would also engage the safety detent pin?

I actually shot 2 complete sequences of 40 pictures from -20 to +20 value of AF fine tuning to satisfy myself I didn't miss a sweet spot. The first time I let the phase AF do its own thing with each shot, so it didn't have to move much between each shot. The second time I manually threw the lens out of focus before each shot so the AF has to work to find the focus with each shot. The results were the same. It was clear the pictures followed a linear trend of becoming softer and more out of focus towards -20, and sharper and more in focus toward +20. There wasn't a peak in the middle. At +20 it still clearly wasn't as sharp as focusing with LV. So I don't think I missed the sweet spot. It looks pretty clear the sweet spot, if any, is outside the range of AF fine tuning. To be clear, the lens was not so soft that it was unusable. But with phase AF it was clearly not the sharpest lens in the bag even before the tests. I was disappointed when I found it was notably softer than the 24-120 in at comparable apertures where the range where they overlapped. So I decided to test it against the 70-200 VR I. The initial results were startling, to say the least. If you blow up the picture to pixel peeping levels, the center the VR I was sharper by a big margin. With VR I at 200mm and f/2.8, you could make out features on a face about 3/4 of a mile away. With VR II the whole head appear to be a smudged blurry ball.

@Shun: Yes, the camera body works well with 70-200 VR I and 24-120 f/4 and 16-35 VR. There is no discenible difference between LV and Phase detection AF with these lenses. 70-200 VR II is the only lens with this issue. I did manually focus with LV, but the results were not discernibly better than LV AF. @Ed: Thanks. But the lens is new, so I don't think I should have to deal with calibration to address this amount of discrepancy. Also B&H will pay shipping to exchange this lens with another, so I will be sending it back for an exchange.

I was testing the new 70-200 VR II against the 70-200 VR I. By reputation the VR II should be sharper. But using phase detection AF on a new D810, I found the VR II is very soft at 200mm f/2.8, much softer than the VR I at same focal length and aperture, especially in the center. When I changed from phase detection to live view AF, the VR II did much better, still not quite as good as VR I in the center, but very close. So I tried to use AF fine tune to bring the phase detection in line with LV AF. I found the amount of fine running required to match Live View is appearently off the scale. The lens does get continuously sharper as one approaches the upper (positive) end of the AF fine tunning scale, but never quite matching live view focus before running to the end of the scale. So I will probably try to exchange the lens, although it is 3-4 days out of the 30 day BH return period. But before I do that, does anyone see anything wrong in what I did to test and calibrate the lens? Is it common for LV and phase AF to be different by that amount? Or is there some optical aberration resulting from a defective lens that can account for this difference?

Another thing is during middle of 28-70's production, canon upstaged it with its highly regarded 24-70. But during 24-70 i's entire production life, canon did not manage to really upstage it.

Primes are not options?

I am looking in particular at a Neewer replacement tripod foot for the Nikon 70-200 VRii, which costs 1/4 as much as Kirk enterprise's equivalent. Like the Kirk foot, it doesn't need an plate. The foot can slot directly into an Arca Swiss style clamp. I know there is nothing to a plate and everyone ought to be able to make one that works as well as any others. But I know really shabby aluminum forging can come with cracks that would swiftly expand until bits separate. Given newer is so cheap, has anyone had any problems with it? Thanks?

I wonder if Nikon is being extra cautious because of the flak it took when it released the D600 somewhat half baked. It wouldn't want any QC issues to besmirch the name of a lens so important to the reputation of its high end lens line.

<p>Has anyone any experience with P0 ball head from Arca Swiss? I am considering it for use with a D810 and upwards of the new 200-500 f/5.6 lens. It seems to be a better design than other Arca Swiss ball heads because by turning the ball head upside down, you always get a panning plane in the correct axis so long as your camera is level, so you don't have to pay the exorbitant AS surcharges (~$200) for a double panning feature.</p>

<p>It sounds very much like a software/firmware issue. Can D700 have its firmware restored from scratch instead of progressively updated?</p>

<p>24-120 f/4VR and 24-70 f/2.8 non-VR seem like a substantially more flexible combination than a single 24-70VR, and if you buy the 24-120VR at kit lens discount, these two lenses combined cost about as much as the new one alone. You also save the cost of a new set of filters.<br> Unless absolute maximum quality with low speed hand held shot at f/2.8 is a must, I am not seeing how this one lens can justify its cost.</p>

<p>D810 has a built in electronic level, what do you need a spirit bubble for?</p>

<p>I thought there is a new AS Slidefix QR system is incompatible with previous AS QR systems. Does this mean the other manufacturers are compatible with only the previous QR system?</p>

Which arca Swiss QR system would you recommend if the heaviest lenses I will conceivably use on it would be the upcoming Nikon 200- 500f/5.6?

I have to point out nikon's detachable tripod moun tfor the 70-200 is rather flexible, especially if you use the screw socket in the front. The tripod collar is not detachable, bu the tripod mount is. You might be better off spending the money to replace the tripod mount on the lens rather than replace the tripod head.

<p>I just received the 24-120 f/4 from B&H. It physically functions just fine, except the AF-S motor emits a quiet but perceptible, slightly scratchy high pitched whine when focusing. None of my other AF-s lenses do that when focusing. Is this normal with this lens?</p>

<p>I have the d variety of these two lenses from 15 years ago. They still function well after 10 years of storage. No oil appears to have run onto the aperture blades (As they have with 35mm f/2d, so the aperture is sluggish in stopping down and opening back up). Do the newer g versions of these lenses offer any significant improvements over the d version? It appears the g variety commands only a modest premium of about $100-150 over the d versions on ebay.</p>

When Nikon publicize a MTBF figure for shutter cycles, what is the definition of failure? Does the shutter actually seize up and stop working completely, or the shutter still functions, but shutter timing begins to fall outside acceptable tolerances?

<p>Instead of buying a white box lens separately and gamble it was a USA lens, I phoned B&H and exchanged the camera body that was purchased alone with the same model camera body with the lens in a kit. It did come with separate warranty cards for the body and the lens. So all is good.<br> <br /> Thanks</p>

<p>I thought the most important Nikon accessory has always been an expense account.</p> <p>Okay, I'll go away now.</p>

<p>D70 is worth about $70 on ebay, it seems unlikely any professional repair would cost much less.<br> Plastistruct sell hobby plastic rods in all shapes and dimensions. They are available in many RC model stores. Some of rods would be nearly the same dimension as the broken off tab. You just have to snip off a piece to the right length, and use a very small amount of crazy glue to affix it to the end of the broken off tab. Take care not to put on too much glue or you will glue the tab to the camera body and thus defeat its function.</p>

I would like to carry a 70-200/2.8 with 2-3 other smaller lenses and 1 d810 with battery grip. Many of the bags I've seen that could hold all this seem to be designed to hold the camera body with the big zoom attached, and smaller lenses in separate padded compartments. This seem like a poor design, because the lens most likely to be used isn't the 70-200/2.8. So it is inconvenient to have to swap lenses each time the camera come out or goes back in. Does anyone know a reasonably compact bag that would allow me to hold the above, but with the camera attached one of the smaller lenses?

Chip, I don't think Ix-Nikkor lenses are really compatible with FX cameras.

Notice the better the camera, the less likely it would be to have a hotshoe cover?

Thanks to the suggestions here, I decided to replace it with a constant aperture 24-120 f/4 VR.