Comments on: Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G rumor (part 3)

By: pete

pete — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 09:44:42 +0000

ECS just knocked $200 off the 70-200VR.
\http://www.cameras.net.au/

By: Joker

Joker — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 07:08:10 +0000

Some of these lenses don’t make sense. Too many midzooms and duplicity.

By: Cesar

Cesar — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 22:08:27 +0000

I’d love a 70-200, no matter what version
If only it was a little bit cheaper…

By: jon

jon — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 20:26:29 +0000

what would the anticipated price be? current 70-200 is already $1900. from past experiences, prices will go up to 40% for newer/revised model.

By: schung

schung — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 18:44:16 +0000

About freaking time they come out with an update for the 70-200. The shorter minimum focus as well as a shorter barrel length is very welcome.
Hopefully, besides the FX corners, they also improve on the position of the focus ring (move it closer to the zoom ring) so that it you can adjust focus easier.

Simon

By: [NR] admin

[NR] admin — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 17:54:15 +0000

nothing new on the D3s for now

By: low

low — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 17:47:49 +0000

rwbenjey > right on! aint nothing wrong with the 80-200.

By: rwbenjey

rwbenjey — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 17:37:53 +0000

I love my 80-200 f2.8!

By: Michael

Michael — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 17:25:13 +0000

I am glad it is not just me….

By: Michael

Michael — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 17:24:31 +0000

Admin, I have a question, have you heard any more about the possibility of a D3s? The last we heard you had a rumor it might be here in the fall?

Thanks!

By: low

low — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 17:18:31 +0000

why? just so folks can complain it doesnt do landscapes good? swallow up your pride and use a 80-200! sheesh.

By: Theo2

Theo2 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 17:04:55 +0000

that makes sense

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:50:16 +0000

We don’t need it.
We want it.

By: Stevens

Stevens — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:45:33 +0000

Me too. Addicted to this site ever since I bought my first dslr, D90 few months back.

By: low

low — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:23:26 +0000

we dont need a new one!

By: Ubiquitous

Ubiquitous — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:13:22 +0000

The 70-200 VR f/2.8G. as it is now, works fine with both the D300 and the D700. There are some soft corners, some times, when shooting into the sky, for example, but easily corrected in PP. Many other lenses have the same problem to some extent like the 24-70. Since I do not have the D3x, I cannot say anything about the combo. Eventually the 70-200 will be replaced, but not with the one that was posted on the Japanese website – it is foolishly optimistic. The 70-200 problems are much deeper than just a minor fine-tuning.

By: D40-Owner

D40-Owner — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:04:31 +0000

Oh yeaaaahh…. Used 70-200VRs for our DX cameras…. I will sleep over an ebay screen for the next few months…

By: D40-Owner

D40-Owner — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:59:44 +0000

I can soooo relate to that…

By: Jim Richardson

Jim Richardson — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:46:50 +0000

Right, the issue to be fixed with that lens is the soft corners on FX. Really visible when doing things like cityscapes at night where you have pinpoint light sources in the corners. But, hey, Nikon as certainly been getting things right on recent lenses so I’m pretty confident they have heard and responded.

By: shivas

shivas — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:27:28 +0000

this site adversely affects my work performance. . .it’s like CRACK, I keep on coming back for more during the day. . .sigh. . .