I’d heard a lot about it, and couldn’t wait to try it. Well, I could actually – a Customs delay had me waiting for a week longer than I had anticipated. However, the delay hardly dented my enthusiasm to try the lens on my own Nikon D70.
For my initial look at the 70-200 VR, I wanted to test the VR (for Vibration Reduction) capability of the lens. I also decided to check its famed sharpness, as well as its reputation for contrast and brightness.
The most obvious first impression about the Nikon 70-200 VR F2.8 is that it is a big lens. In fact, it is a very big lens, and I’ll give you some more information on that later. But as I found out, it is also an exceptionally good lens.
Let’s look initially at how the lens does what it was designed for: hand-held pictures at slower shutter speeds than one could normally expect with a telephoto lens. Most of us are familiar with the old photographer’s rule of thumb (or is that Old Photographer’s rule of thumb!) which reminds us to use a shutter speed no slower than the inverse of the focal length of the lens to reduce blur due to camera shake. In other words, if your lens is a 200mm telephoto, then you should shoot at 1/200sec or faster; otherwise the magnification of the lens will make camera shake too obvious. Camera shake isn’t confined to long lenses by the way – but the magnification factor (a 200mm lens gives 4 times the magnification of a standard 50mm lens) makes it more obvious in the resultant picture.
Here is a photo of some flowers taken indoors, with natural light only, using the VR lens. The EXIF for the shot of the yellow flowers reads: shutter speed 1/50 sec; aperture f2.8; focal length 155mm. Hand-held!
http://www.pixspot.com./displayimage.ph ... &pos=0.jpg
I think you’d have to agree with me – this lens will surely provide photographers with much more flexibility in difficult shooting conditions.
The purple blooms below were taken at: 1/30 sec; f2.8; 190mm. Hand-held! When you frame your shot and half-squeeze the shutter button, you “feel” the VR technology firm up your shot. You can see evidence of the stillness through the viewfinder, and if you then release the shutter button, there is an audible click as the VR mechanism lets go. It’s truly wonderful!
http://www.pixspot.com./displayimage.ph ... &pos=1.jpg
In my tests for sharpness and contrast, I compared shots taken with the new lens to photos made in similar conditions with my Nikon 70-300mm AF ED lens. I have to point out that the tests are completely amateur and very subjective – I have no elaborate measuring equipment, so I have to rely on what my eyes tell me.
My eyes actually told me that the VR lens has amazing clarity and sharpness – better than the 70-300mm ED lens (IMHO). I found colours to be truer, contrast to be much improved, and my images had much more “snap” using the newer lens.
The photo immediately below was taken off my back balcony with the VR lens. At full size, the clarity of this image is stunning. There is complete definition of the people on the front of the CityCat (about 300 meters away), and the colours are true.
http://www.pixspot.com./displayimage.ph ... &pos=2.jpg
The next shot, below, was taken with the 70-300mm ED lens. There is a noticeable difference in contrast and sharpness. The image is certainly acceptable, but it lacks some punch, particularly at full size.
http://www.pixspot.com./displayimage.ph ... &pos=3.jpg
Now, about the size of this baby. It is not a piece of kit for the faint-hearted, as it weighs in at almost 1.5kg, and sticks out 215mm from the front of the camera. I had looked at these specs prior to seeing the lens, but the lens still had considerable shock value when I picked it up to mount on the camera.
I happen to be a reasonably big guy, (I played rugby in the front-row for about 15 years; that will tell you a lot about my looks!) but this lens takes some handling. I seriously wonder about the ability of those smaller, older or less robust camera nuts to be able to lug it around for long. And yet somehow, the idea of using it only on a tripod or in the studio seems a waste of its considerable capabilities.
The 70-200 VR will certainly be an important part of my gear. In fact, I see it being my most valuable, if not the most used, lens, just because of its stunning output. I wholeheartedly recommend it to you – but there is a qualifier on the portability of the lens for some photographers.
DSLRUsers.com
A discussion forum - and more - for users of Digital Single Lens Reflex cameras.
Nikon 70-200mm VR AF-S ED (phew!)Moderator: Moderators
Forum rules
Please ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is. Nikon 70-200mm VR AF-S ED (phew!)
Waste of time?
Was my 70-200 VR review helpful to anyone? 
*desperately seeking input*
Re: Waste of time?
[quote="cricketfan"
Was my 70-200 VR review helpful to anyone?
*desperately seeking input*[/quote] Thanks Cricketfan, No your review only made me more depress 
May be I should bought the 70-200 VR before Xmas. Oh well, may be next year... the 70-200 VR or 80-400 VR or 70-300 VR ( I wish). Cheers Peter
unfair !!!
I am also very depressed.
Also full of envy. Glad you have to carry the weight around ! Sticks out like the proverbial ... ! Only goes up to 200mm ! (sob, sob , sob: I'd love to have one of these babies !) regards CD
Hi Cricketfan, Well i agree with post already made, i have this on my wish list for sure, but a bit more reach would be nice and well maybe with the 1.4 or 1.7 Tc which i have heard still gives very sharp images, maybe more so than the 2.0x teleconvertor, i could be wrong but would be interesting.
Thanks for your post and info, we will lust even more now. Cheers John BBJ D3,D2x,D70,18-70 kit lens,Sigma 70-200mm F2.8EX HSM,Nikon AF-I 300m F2.8, TC20E 2X
80-400VR,SB800,Vosonic X Drive,VP6210 40 http://www.oz-images.com
Hi Cricketfan
Very informative, espically when it comes to the practical use. I think it's a great lens! The good ol L-Lust keeps on gaining for all of us I might have to try and step up to it though from the 24 - 120 Lens, price tag... Thanks for the review
Cricketfan,
I would have to agree with you on most points. Especially the shock value when you take it out of the box. I had a few seconds of wow.....what was I doing with this again.....oh....yeah! Unfortunately I have been working so much this past week and the weather horrible I haven't really had time to play with it much. Soon....soon.. A D70, 70-200VR, 18-70, 50 1.8, SB800
Blackberry PIN: 2029497E
atencati, Sorry to hear that you're too busy at work at this time of the year. Please check "the expiry date" on the lens  otherwise you'll be missedBirddog114
VNAF, My Beloved Country and Airspace
cricketfan
i have had my 70-200vr for about four months and i am delighted with the sharpness, i was using my 70-300 for sports photo's for the local paper but was not happy with the sharpness, like you i was amazed at the size of the vr with my t/c made it a bit bigger, i dream of owning a 200-400 vr ......... maybe next christmas cheers rob
Great review Cricketfan,
Yes lens lust a plenty now, could you post an image with the 70-200 VR and the 70-300g side by side to give an appreciation of the size. Thanks MATT
Great idea Matt! And here it is. I have included a ruler to give you some perspective. What do you think? I must say, the more I use it, the more comfortable I become with it. 
IMHO, my 70-200VR is in my bag with the 85/1.4 + 28/1.4 + 24-120VR + 17-35/2.8 and tag along with me to many places, my 80-400VR stays home in the cupboard. I used 70-200VR in many venue or assigments day or night, handhold it mostly, yes! my shoulder and hands suffered after a long day with it mounted onto my D2h, but I'm enjoyed, and never leave home without it! Birddog114
VNAF, My Beloved Country and Airspace
Wow!!!
Thanks for posting the pic - almost twice the length. I'm developing an unhealthy longing for this (can't bear to say the other L word or I might weaken). Have to visit the big smoke to try one out to see if the $$$$ are justified since I'm just an amateur, not a pro Good review on this lens at http://www.bythom.com/70200VRlens.htm Peter
Disclaimer: I know nothing about anything. *** smugmug galleries: http://www.stubbsy.smugmug.com ***
It stays home cos I like the 70-200VR most in fast AF, razor sharp in any type of lighting and shooting, as portrait, candid shoot The 80-400VR is real good if there's a quite good lighting, slow in panning bird in flight, it serves difference purposes than the 70-200VR. Hunt a lot in low light. Even with the TC 14/1.7/2.0 the 70-200VR si still far best than the 80-400VR, if you had the 70-300G or ED than you'll see the 80-400VR is the ones mostly like, but when you have both of them than definitely you'll have the 70-200VR most in your bag. I like the 80-400VR with the reachable. The 200-400VR is in difference league and lens. Birddog114
VNAF, My Beloved Country and Airspace
mmmmmmmmmmm...200-400 VR.
Wish the kit lens was VR, that would be nice too. It would make for easy lens decisions. Kit (18-70), 70-200, 200-400, wow, I shoud wake up now. A D70, 70-200VR, 18-70, 50 1.8, SB800
Blackberry PIN: 2029497E
Andy, If you can have the 12-24 at the other end is also good! Yep! 200-400VR will be at the other end also! then you get covered in the full range. My next lust is 300/VR, I'm going back home in May or early June! just about time to renew my driver license with DMV, I'm from SoCAL. Birddog114
VNAF, My Beloved Country and Airspace
Lens Pix
Still there, I think!
Anyway, here is link if not displayed on earlier message: http://newms.smugmug.com/photos/13295472-M.jpg See ya
I'm in SoCal with just 2 lenses - 24-120VR and 80-400VR. It's raining today and I'm about to do some shopping; hopefully the weather will improve so that I have a nice sunset dinner at Las Brisas later on. g.
Gary Stark Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
Gary, Our dollar is quite strong today, shop till you drop! Have you seen any Epson P-2000 in Fry's or Compu USA? Cosco at Fountain Valley has some special on AA rechargeable batteries (2500 Ni Mh), my BIL told me yesterday. Where are you shopping? South Coast Plaza? not too far from Laguna Hills. Birddog114
VNAF, My Beloved Country and Airspace
Hey Birdy, since you spend so much time and effort doing for others AND you are a good cali boy AND I just happened to be stationed about a block from Fry's..if you ever want me to check on or pick somthing up and ship it to ya just say the word. I wander in there about 2x a week minimum!
Andy D70, 70-200VR, 18-70, 50 1.8, SB800
Blackberry PIN: 2029497E
Thanks Andy, Next trip home, I'll perhaps driving up San Jose for a reunion, will page you once I'm in the Bay area. Birddog114
VNAF, My Beloved Country and Airspace
Not yet made it to SCP. Fry's on the way south from the airport; there's a new Best Buy just 2 minute's drive from my hotel, plus the one about 5 miles further south, with the CompUSA right next door and Border's next door again. I've looked but can't see any P2000s. Did pick up the Sandisk 256+WiFi SD card though - $130. It works fine through the $60 802.11g router. Also, no more waiting on Channel 9 to put on the last series of Frasier - $35 at Walmart. One thing I've noticed is that at Best Buy they're carrying a range of traditional (round, screw-in) filters carrying the Cokin brand name. g.
Gary Stark Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
Gary, Well done Gary, just one day, you've already scoured all the topic places, where's your next move? Birddog114
VNAF, My Beloved Country and Airspace
Tex-Mex!
g.
Gary Stark Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
That is one mightly impressive lens. Bigger than an old 85 - 205 M42 screw mount manual pentax lens i have here thats F3.8 constant. That was a good lens in its day. Looking at it again makes me want one of these. I quite like looking at that 70 - 300 sitting next to it.. it's so small it almost cute.
Sure Birdy, I grew up in San Jo, know it well. Did you go to school there? Andy D70, 70-200VR, 18-70, 50 1.8, SB800
Blackberry PIN: 2029497E
I was from Portalnd, OR, moved to San Jose then SoCAL, went to UCLA, backed to Seattle, worked for Boeing. Birddog114
VNAF, My Beloved Country and Airspace
Apparenty there will be a $150US rebate on the 20-200 in the US from 1/1/05!!
Chris Chris
-------------------------------- I started my life with nothing and I’ve still got most of it left
Chris, This only works with US address on registration. Birddog114
VNAF, My Beloved Country and Airspace
Great review, makes me want it even more now
 Oh well will have to wait for a while yet...
To those with the 70-200 VR and a 1.4 or 1.7 tc have you any side by side comparison shots? Like those with the VR and 70-300 ED above. Cheers Brett
Brett, I have the 1.7TC, will put up a few comparison shots in the next few days while I have one of Birddy's ballheads. I couldn't find much when I made the decision to purchase
For all those with 70-200 or equivalently heavy lens, in this case 1.5kg of it. Does the weight ever deter you from using the lens at all?
I have been contemplating a tele lens upgrade from my plastic 70-300D but the weight of the 80-200 or 70-200 has really discouraged me. DN26
I have never been detered from using my 70-200VR - by its weight.
I does get a bit much when I used it hand held through an entire sporting match ('bout 1.30hrs) - but then that's my fault for not having a monopod. Craig
I can use my 70-200VR all day from 6:00 till mid night without tripod on the D2h/ D100, the more I used the more I want it on my cameras Birddog114
VNAF, My Beloved Country and Airspace
It's manageable
I spent two hours standing on the front deck of a ferry taking hand-held shots with the 70-200 VR last Tuesday.
When I wasn't shooting, I held the camera with the lens cradled in the elbow of my left arm. There's no doubt that it is a heavy lens, but it is manageable, and I am not sorry that I have it. The images are outstanding. I guess if you were going trekking or bushwalking for a few days, you would have to ask whether it would be worthwhile to carry this lens. But for a few hours or even a day if it didn't involve a lot of climbing, I'm sure you'd be OK. 
Trevor
Hi
I've asked this question of the 12-24DX too: Could someone please measure the diameter of the 70-200VR hood, and if possible, the length with both end caps on and the hood reversed (I trust that the hood reverses)?
This is EXACTLY like when I went to the jemsite forums, a guy was showing his guitar collection, and I'm going to say the same thing here:
"I fucking hate you and your guitars (or lens in this case)!"
Rather than start a new thread, I will add this link here - a very thorough review of the 70-200 VR by a dpreview member:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=12668200
Just thought I'd add some pics, comparing the Nikkor to the Canon. Despite the size diff, the Canon weighs more.
Colour consistency merely for amusement purposes (it wouldn't be the same if the Nikkor was black). 
Send it back to me and I'll have the "white" for you Birddog114
VNAF, My Beloved Country and Airspace
|
- Mods Database • The team • Delete all board cookies • Reset blocks • All times are UTC + 10 hours [ DST ]
