MaxGreen said:
Oh...and BE HAPPY!

70-200 VR II at f/3.5, 98 mm, 1/250, ISO 2500
http://ghostlight.zenfolio.com/img/v2/p864198884-5.jpg

Max

Great and not so happy a picture

BTW Max have you tried other lenses to check how they perform when focusing to min distance at max mm. I tried my 16-85 VR at 85mm and when you focus from infinity to min distance I would think that it zooms out close to 15%

Pete

BTW that was like my last B Day, when the numbers goes up you your are less trilled to see that B Day Cake, mine was more like a Forest Fire anyway

Oh...and BE HAPPY!

70-200 VR II at f/3.5, 98 mm, 1/250, ISO 2500
http://ghostlight.zenfolio.com/img/v2/p864198884-5.jpg

Max

I will shoot a bunch of portrait tests...real world stuff...tomorrow and post them Sunday.

Max

bmxdad said:
How much would the new 24-70 VR "FoZoom"

Pete

If it is sharp, has good VR and works for my shooting style then it can have all the "Pete_FoZoom" it wants :P

PBrigido said:
I think we are in the same mindset JA. If they released a 24-70 with VR, that could easily be one of Nikons best ever lenses they could ever release.

But back to the topic, I'm interested in seeing some of those shots when you get around to posting them.

How much would the new 24-70 VR "FoZoom"

Pete

I think we are in the same mindset JA. If they released a 24-70 with VR, that could easily be one of Nikons best ever lenses they could ever release.

But back to the topic, I'm interested in seeing some of those shots when you get around to posting them.

MaxGreen said:
And no, I'm not one of those people who buys into the whole "softer portrait lens" bit. Soft sucks and I'll start with a sharp picture, thank you!

Exactly. I've never understood why you would want anything but the sharpest image to start with. It's easy enough to soften an image, but not the other way round.

optimaforever said:
seen its cost I guess lot of people can't afford it and yet everyone talk of it like the new boyfriend of the girl nextdoor ;-)

Great analogy, and I'm one of the ones fantasizing. I'm getting one next year, unless there's a 24-70 2.8 VR released in the meantime.

OK I think we should try to keep this thread a "only the bright side of the 70-200 VRII" thread :D

good news indeed max!
I must add that the 200mm f/4 micro AFnotyetS notyetVR is very sharp for portraits as well (but I haven't tried the tamron 180 yet si I can't compare), and I wait for nikon to update their best macro lens.
wow how many threads on the web for this 70-200 alone? seen its cost I guess lot of people can't afford it and yet everyone talk of it like the new boyfriend of the girl nextdoor ;-)
so much expectation for this lens... I guess this fever will repeat soon with the release of the 85 f/1.4 AFS VR lololol

Okay, no I didn't find a hidden button to make the lens go to 190 at 5 feet, but I did some more real-world shooting today.

One of my favorite "long" portrait lenses, oddly enough is the Tamron 180 DI Macro. It's a constant 3.5 and last summer I tried it out and found it essentially superior to the 70-200 VR I, mainly because it was super sharp and produced bokeh of the same caliber. Even without VR I ended up shooting a lot with it.

http://ghostlight.zenfolio.com/img/v8/p446322618-5.jpg

So this evening I did some quick and dirty tests and found that at about 8 feet away the FOV was quite close, with the Tamron obviously losing some magnification as well. Bokeh was so close that it was really a toss up. But the Nikon was as sharp at 2.8 as the Tamron was at 3.5, and that's a big deal.

My Tamron 180 literally trounces most lenses for sharpness...until now. And of course the new 70-200 is a faster optic that zooms, with VR, AF-S and pro build quality. So my rather diluted point is that the 70-200 II is besting a prime that I deemed optically superior to the 70-200 VR I and I'm now reconsidering the portrait side of the discussion. The 70-200 II will probably be better overall for portraits as it is stunningly sharp wide open. And no, I'm not one of those people who buys into the whole "softer portrait lens" bit. Soft sucks and I'll start with a sharp picture, thank you!

I STILL think event shooters...concerts, parties and weddings, will miss the bigger range of the old lens, but clearly this new lens has some great qualities that must be considered. If Nikon is also updating it's TC's we may also see yet another leap forward for this lens.

I will post some portrait samples from the VR II in the next couple of days.
See? I'm not all gloom and doom!

Cheers,

Max