kanuck said:
Geez are the prices for the older Nikkor 70-200mm VR 1 ever dropping like crazy. New or used this might be something to consider as well. Great deals for pro 2.8 glass!

Yes they are!! For a pristine 70-200VRI 2.8 @ $1,200 (like I've seen offered) would be TOUGH to pass up!! Glad used prices finally went down. I think the newer 4.0 will certainly have better optics, along with more distortion, lower build quality, and lower resale value.

http://fotospekter.si/test-objektiva-nikon-af-s-nikkor-70-200mm-f4g-ed-vr-ko-pipetkarji-obmolknejo/

sharp, good with teleconverters, some distortion at 200mm

....and halo to you all, my first post here.

spraynpray said:
It would be interesting to see a comparison test of the old and new wouldn't it?

Do you mean the Nikkor 2.8 VR 1 and VR 2 compared? If so, the new VR 2 smokes it considerably judging by what I have seen and read on the net. Good idea iris about comparing all three from F4 and up. I hear the near F4 VR III has very similar optics to the new 70-200 VR 2 I guess we will find out soon. Lots of info and shots coming I am sure in the next 4 weeks and into 2013..

Actually I'd like to see a comparison between this one and each of the VRI and VRII lenses at f/4 and up.

It would be interesting to see a comparison test of the old and new wouldn't it?

Geez are the prices for the older Nikkor 70-200mm VR 1 ever dropping like crazy. New or used this might be something to consider as well. Great deals for pro 2.8 glass!

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1160567/3

A good summary of an actual user with actual images posted. Hate to link to another site, but it is what it is: the first real review I found. Looks great, but with distortion as expected.

Rx4Photo said:
Anybody here taking delivery soon???

I wish...will have to wait for reviews first. And someone who bought impulsively and sells it slightly used for $1,000. Should be a great lens, but once again price is king in my world. :-)

Anybody here taking delivery soon???

Eric said:
@rortmanns - Nikon did make a 70-210 f/4 AF. It was produced from 1986 - 1988 and was a pretty good lens. They are available quite reasonably and still do a great job. No VR and no distance info, but at under $300...

That lens is a bit long in the tooth, I'm thinking that's about the same era as the E type lenses, I have the 75-150/3.5, its a beautiful lens but i have issues with the one touch zoom which creeps when I put it on a tripod. I will do some reading on the 70-210 but is seems very rare here in Australia in any case. If Nikon updated that I'd be a buyer.

Has anyone used this lens? Any comments on issues such as the creep in the 75-150?

Bland said:
Just read Nikon got a patent for a 100-300 F4.

Hardly worth bothering with the 70-200 and a TC 1.4 you have the same thing. If it were 2.8 I would be interested. I am thinking I will grab a Sigma 120-300 2.8 from all my reading it is a sweet lens

@rortmanns - Nikon did make a 70-210 f/4 AF. It was produced from 1986 - 1988 and was a pretty good lens. They are available quite reasonably and still do a great job. No VR and no distance info, but at under $300...

The 70-300mm VR is a wonderful lens just not very fast especially in challenging light. Very sharp though and a wonderful deal. Don't forget the great 70-200mm VR 1, which has really dropped in price as well. Just be careful to try out any used samples and look them over carefully as a lot of working pros dumped these once the re-fresh came out. The 70-200mm VR F4 would be a welcome addition to the Nikkor family, but don't expect it until the last quarter this year at the earliest..

Niz said:
^^^ That 100-300 F4 looks interesting, but what I really want Nikon to make is a 200mm F2.8 lens around $800 like Canon has, that would be really nice.

See Nikon just cant leave it alone, they cant just make a nice 70-200f4 thats light and compact, they have to add a 100mm to it, 100mm that is poor quality. Is the lens designer at Nikon a really little man trying to compensate? Just build slower high IQ lenses!! If I want a junk lens I'll buy a tamron, tokina, sigma of that type at half the price.

The older 70-200 f2.8 vr is a sweet lens. Lots of flexibility. Add a TC converter, add a filter you still under f5.6 for AF to work. Great for portraits, sports, airshows, kids running. I use it in theaters with great success.

I just checked fleabay completed sales and saw a sale as low as 999.00 most around 1400.00

framer

^^^ That 100-300 F4 looks interesting, but what I really want Nikon to make is a 200mm F2.8 lens around $800 like Canon has, that would be really nice.

Just read Nikon got a patent for a 100-300 F4.

donaldejose said:
You could also look at the old 80-200 f2.8 and you would find them for less than $1,000.

That's what I did - $770 for a used AF-D 80-200 2.8 (latest type). It's a wonderful lens, so solid it doubles as a cosh.

try an AF-D 80-200/2.8, its brand new at about 1000 $.
in case you use it on DX, look out for a 70-200 VR1, they are getting cheaper.
a friend uses an AF-S 80-200/2.8 with his D700 and that is a very good lens also.
i sold my 70-200/2.8 VR due to size and other lens-plans. if i needed another tele-zoom i would definitely look out for an AF-S 80-200/2.8

I have 3 80-200mm f/2.8's and they ran about $400-$500 apeice. Wonderful lenses

I'd definitely recommend the 80-200mm 2.8 or Sigma's 70-200mm 2.8. Beware of the Sigma though, really bad quality control although very good quality if gotten good copies.

You could also look at the old 80-200 f2.8 and you would find them for less than $1,000.

I wonder if Nikon will make real the patents issued for this lens ... Please, Nikon, hopefully soon!
:P

Thanks! your input is appreciated. I'll have a look at the 70-300.

I mostly agree with willis. If you can get the 1000, then it might be worth it to dave a bit more. I have the older model and like willis suggested, I got a good deal on it on ebay.

Otherwise, the 70-300 is the next best option. While you will not have a constant aperture, (which believe it or not you'll miss once you've had it), in overall sharpness, it's every bit as good up to 200mm. Softer wehn pushed to its limits like any consumer zoom. However if really all you need is 200mm it's awesome, much better than the 55-200 at 200mm that's for sure.