Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Advice on 70-200mm zoom for Nikon

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

Martin54
Martin54 e2 Member 8495 forum postsMartin54 vcard United Kingdom
24 Jul 2012 - 1:17 PM

For chapter & verse on Nikon VR take a look at Thom Hogan's page on the subject. Towards the end he comments on the capability of VR1 vs VR2 (VR2 probably slightly better).

One important thing to remember is that while VR may help you shoot at a lower shutter speed, if you subject is moving you will still get a blurred image. In this case all you can do is increase your shutter speed on the camera.

I have the 70-200 f2.8 VR1 and it is a superb lens, a good few of the shots on the front page of my portfolio are taken with it.

Last Modified By Martin54 at 24 Jul 2012 - 1:19 PM
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
24 Jul 2012 - 1:17 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

uzi9mm
uzi9mm  378 forum posts United Kingdom
24 Jul 2012 - 5:54 PM

my mate uses the tamaron 70-200 2.8 on his sony a77 the pictures are excellant from the lens. if i had 600 quid my nikon d3100 would have the tamaron as well but i dont so i'll be sticking with my 55-300vr2 which i fined is a great lens as well and it is half the weight of the tamron system which im glad about too.

SEMANON
SEMANON  295 forum posts United Kingdom
25 Jul 2012 - 12:47 AM

Sony has built in image stabilization though, I'm sure image quality is very similar, I just want a lens that I can fall in love with & marry(type thing) - get passionate about - keep forever basically,I'm hoping this will be it.I'm about 90 percent convinced it will be - I can afford at the min, and all going well should be starting a college photography course in sept, so why not. The trouble with reading to much up on a lens is you get to point where you've read too many opinions too make sense, I've read only 1 in 3 are any good,sharp,soft. its the best thing on the planet, too big, too small,sharp,soft...................... That's why I wanted a few 'normal' peoples actual experience's with it or similar.

779HOB
779HOB  2998 forum posts United Kingdom
25 Jul 2012 - 8:11 AM

I only use the the 70-200 handheld and think the VR works well. I used it last weekend on a small boat bobbing about on the sea just off Port Isaac and even there it worked well. If you get the 70-200 I don't think you will be unhappy. That said mine is the Mk1 so I can't really comment on the performance of the Mk2 but I can't imagine it's not as good or better.

uzi9mm
uzi9mm  378 forum posts United Kingdom
25 Jul 2012 - 9:10 AM

don' get to hung up on mod cons like image sabilization. we never neeed it in the 70s-80s my 55-300mm knows when its on a tripod or monopod so it turns it off anyway and the monopod so much easyer to old a small camera anyway it helps to consentrait on takin pics.

779HOB
779HOB  2998 forum posts United Kingdom
25 Jul 2012 - 9:17 AM


Quote: don' get to hung up on mod cons like image sabilization

That's very true - it's definitely not a magic wand you still have to be able to hold the thing with steady hands, it's a nice addition though.

SEMANON
SEMANON  295 forum posts United Kingdom
25 Jul 2012 - 1:30 PM

I do plan on using handheld quite a bit, so am now 99percent sure I'm going to go for 70-200 VR (version 1) - probably later today from MPB. Thanks for adviceSmile

thewilliam
25 Jul 2012 - 4:40 PM

Check out Ffordes and Grays as well as MPB. All are very strict when it comes to inspection and grading descriptions.

SEMANON
SEMANON  295 forum posts United Kingdom
26 Jul 2012 - 9:25 PM

Whats the Nikon Nikkor AF 80-200mm F/2.8 D ED like? I'm thinking about getting it with a D300 - I can get both for less than a 70-200VR1 incidently

Last Modified By SEMANON at 26 Jul 2012 - 9:28 PM
thewilliam
26 Jul 2012 - 11:23 PM

When choosing my 80-200, I reckoned the cheaper D lens fell a long way short in terms of handling. There's a good reason why the AFS version was practically twice the price when it was new. Only the AFS version will auto-focus on a D3100.

She-who-must-be-obeyed has a Mark 1 70-200 VR and it's nowhere near as sharp as my 80-200, especially near the corners.

SEMANON
SEMANON  295 forum posts United Kingdom
27 Jul 2012 - 9:35 AM

The one they have on Amazon at the minute I was going to orde
Quote: When choosing my 80-200, I reckoned the cheaper D lens fell a long way short in terms of handling. There's a good reason why the AFS version was practically twice the price when it was new. Only the AFS version will auto-focus on a D3100.

She-who-must-be-obeyed has a Mark 1 70-200 VR and it's nowhere near as sharp as my 80-200, especially near the corners.

The one I was going to order was the one they have on Amazon at the minute (80-200) Its not AFS, but I am getting a second hand D300 also. The cheaper push/pull version is the not so good one??

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.