I would like to buy the 70-200 f2.8 VR but it is over my budget. I was wondering if anyone knows if Nikon will make a 70-200 f4 VR at about 1000$ less similar to the Canon.
70-200mm f4 VR
(28 posts) (22 voices)-
Posted 3 years ago #
-
You have 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G AF-S VR, very much same performance from 70mm to 200mm like Canon plus you have 100mm bonus and it is very affordable.
Posted 3 years ago # -
If you can wrangle up $1000 for a lens, then it really only a matter of time before you can get the scratch together for the older model 70-200 f2.8 (Sells new for about $1900, but I'll wager you can find a deal on a used one closer to the $1400-$1500 range). If you need the speed and sharpness, I'd keep saving.
If you don't, there's quite a few lower priced options like the $219 55-200 (DX), $550 70-300 (my recommendation) or you could go off brand, like a sigma 70-200f2.8 ($799)or even the 150-500 ($999).
Posted 3 years ago # -
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.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Thanks! your input is appreciated. I'll have a look at the 70-300.
Posted 3 years ago # -
I wonder if Nikon will make real the patents issued for this lens ... Please, Nikon, hopefully soon!
:PPosted 1 year ago # -
You could also look at the old 80-200 f2.8 and you would find them for less than $1,000.
Posted 1 year ago # -
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.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I have 3 80-200mm f/2.8's and they ran about $400-$500 apeice. Wonderful lenses
Posted 1 year ago # -
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 80-200/2.8Posted 1 year ago # -
-
Just read Nikon got a patent for a 100-300 F4.
Posted 12 months ago # -
^^^ 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.
Posted 12 months ago # -
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
Posted 10 months ago # -
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.
Posted 10 months ago # -
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..
Posted 10 months ago # -
@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...
Posted 10 months ago # -
-
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?
Posted 10 months ago # -
Anybody here taking delivery soon???
Posted 5 months ago # -
-
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.
Posted 5 months ago # -
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!
Posted 5 months ago # -
It would be interesting to see a comparison test of the old and new wouldn't it?
Posted 5 months ago # -
Actually I'd like to see a comparison between this one and each of the VRI and VRII lenses at f/4 and up.
Posted 5 months ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
