Comments on: AF-S Nikkor 70-200 mm f/2.8G ED VR II details

By: Nikon Update

Nikon Update — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 04:22:35 +0000

OK, BUT what are these missing lenses???

Lens 2192 <—— 18-200mm VRII
Lens 2191
Lens 2190
Lens 2189
Lens 2188
Lens 2187
Lens 2186
Lens 2185 <———— 70-200mm VR II
Lens 2184
Lens 2182

By: big daddy

big daddy — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 21:09:36 +0000

slightly shorter How will I compensate for my inadequacies with that. I think I will stick with the non-nano version.

By: low

low — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 20:51:36 +0000

you will pay a bit more…i dont think the store would mind if you returned it for the new one within their return policy.

By: CO

CO — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 20:46:21 +0000

Got a problem….. literally just got my 70-200mm 2.8 today and just learned about the new one coming out. Is it worth me returning this lens and waiting for the new one???

By: low

low — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 20:11:46 +0000

The “It Has Begun Party” will be happening tonight. Whos staying up with me F5′ing NR like a madman??

(Even though the current 70-200 vr is perfect, unless you’re shooting blue skyies and brick walls, lol!) *pitch forks in hand* Bring on the new camera(s) and lenses!!

Let this day be remembered, that anywhere, any rumor is started, we all shall be the first to acknowledge its truth and existence!!

By: Fotograf Stuttgart

Fotograf Stuttgart — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 18:58:03 +0000

they are afaik only closeup doublets on market so that makes them worth it, much cheaper then any lens even prime. When i want zooms, then i prefer simple and high quality overall. I dont want to remmember that at 150 and above i need to stop down or that close focusing is midrange quality and i need to stay over 2m far to get again high quality. It would be near impossible to make such good zoom which yet works as (equally good) close focusing lens and keep it at reasonable price/size.
Keep it simple and use workarounds for special cases.

By: WoutK89

WoutK89 — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 18:29:03 +0000

See you tomorrow morning all waiting for the goods to be there

By: Gustav

Gustav — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 18:24:54 +0000

The word you mean is “hypocritical.”

There’s nothing ironic about this.

By: Ken Elliott

Ken Elliott — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 17:28:10 +0000

The tripod foot on the 70-200 is fine. The foot on the 80-400 is a joke and Nikon should be ashamed. I replaced mine (80-400) with a RRS collar and foot. The cool thing about the RRS collar is it uses the same foot as the 70-200, so I can carry one fewer part.

By: Snicker

Snicker — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 14:44:53 +0000

Use my approach, buy the lens – don’t tell wife. When she ask if it is a new lens, answer: what? this old thing?

When it’s time to purchase a new camera I order a trip abroad and the camera simultaneously. Works every time.

By: agitprop

agitprop — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 13:08:04 +0000

Let the gear enema begin:

http://washingtondc.craigslist.org/nva/pho/1294787651.html

By: Fried Toast

Fried Toast — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:25:09 +0000

Light, yes. But fairly cheap? I guess if you’re comparing it to a full-size pro lens they’re cheap. Last time I looked (I admit, it was ~2 yrs ago), I was amazed at how expensive they were. Ended up not getting one because I thought the price was fairly steep (do believe I was looking at a fairly large diameter one, too).

By: Fried Toast

Fried Toast — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:23:10 +0000

Time to break out Google, pal.

LOL. Open mouth, insert both feet.

By: Daniel

Daniel — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:15:31 +0000

“New faster Auto Focus”
This feature alone will make me buy this new version. Had to go back to the screw driven 80-200 because of the lacking AFS-motor.

By: Fried Toast

Fried Toast — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:14:27 +0000

Understand your explanation. It just seemed like an odd question as the filter size was written up there already.

Don’t mine my snarkiness. Half the time I’m posting in the morning right after waking up Not that anyone should really give a care what anyone else on teh intarweb says anyway

By: Fried Toast

Fried Toast — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:10:30 +0000

Oh, definitely (Softmap used downstairs in Akihabara = my friend)!
I just use Yodobashi/Bic, etc. as a standard. Regardless, I don’t very often see prices matching the US prices (even while looking on Kakaku). I haven’t looked much since the Nikon price raise, however, so I could be a bit out of the loop on pricing now.

By: Fried Toast

Fried Toast — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:05:31 +0000

Would it be too much to ask for the new VR II version to AF as fast as the 24-70?
We can only hope, right?

By: Fried Toast

Fried Toast — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:04:55 +0000

I posted first thing in the morning, so wasn’t awake yet. Completely skipped over the fact that you were shooting fast-moving subjects. I’ve got the 2-ring 80-200 and love it, but the AF definitely does *NOT* keep up.

I’d offer to buy one o’ your 70-200s, but now that the new one’s comin’ out, I’ll probably spring for one of those

By: Plug

Plug — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:53:48 +0000

Weed! Get in th gym.

By: Micke

Micke — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 10:55:55 +0000

Don’t be ridiculous, just hire a Sherpa!