200 f2

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by hans, Mar 27, 2005.

  1. hans

    hans

    827
    Feb 5, 2005
    The Netherlands
    I have the 70-200 VR 2.8 great lens

    Since it's always"dark" here I'm hesitating which one to get
    A 200 f2 vr with a TC 1.7 or a 300 f2,8 vr
    On darker days I won't use the TC,leaves me with a great f2 200 for my four legged baby,with sun mount the TC which brings me more than 300mm

    I got the 28 f1.4 and very pleased with it in low light situations.
    hence my question
     
  2. nfoto

    nfoto Guest

    The 200/2 VR is an amazing performer. If you can afford it, there is hardly any better lens to be found.
     
  3. My dream lens! I could live without all the 85 1.4 in this world for this lens! :D
     
  4. F15Todd

    F15Todd

    Feb 1, 2005
    Tennessee
    Also on my dream list.
     
  5. nfoto

    nfoto Guest

    I've done something with the dreams, so have the 200/2 (manual focus), 200/2 VR AFS, AF 85/1.4 and to complete the picture, the MF 85/1.4. All of which have their own merits. Since I resist the temptation to bring all of them with me simultaneously, there is no conflict here either :)
     
  6. MontyDog

    MontyDog

    Jan 30, 2005
    #1064 - You have an error in your SQL syntax;
     
  7. nfoto

    nfoto Guest

    Strange news about Nikon Pro magazine. I got an assignment from them (through the Swedish Nikon agency, by the way :)) to illustrate what you could achieve with this lens. I did so, in my own way of course, I was interviewed by phone from their UK correspondent, and the article with accompanying images was sent me for proofing. Then, I got a letter from the Editor saying that although the editorial staff and Nikon Europe BV all had given the article thumbs up, there had been "severe" complaints from "higher departments" about the images being unsharp so not showing the 300 VR to its fullest potential, and accordingly, the same higher authority rejected the entire article for printing.

    Could you describe the content of the article you saw? it might have been the very one officially rejected by Nikon Japan, which is quite interesting if it eventually went to print.
     
  8. Carol Steele

    Carol Steele Guest

    Hi Bjorn,

    It was only a smallish insert which appeared

    [​IMG]
     
  9. nfoto

    nfoto Guest

    OK. they obeyed the High Command orders.
     
  10. MontyDog

    MontyDog

    Jan 30, 2005
    #1064 - You have an error in your SQL syntax;
     
  11. Hoi Hans,
    Surely the 200 / 2.0 is a hunk of a lens. But since you have a 70-200 1:2.8 already, I would think that a 300 / 2.8 would give you a bigger bang for your buck....errrrr ....Euro :)
    You will find that the 300 / 2.8 (any version) opens up a great dimension for you.

    Groet,

    Frits
     
  12. hans

    hans

    827
    Feb 5, 2005
    The Netherlands
    You did the right thing Bjorn

    Stll haven't made my mind up yet
     
  13. I have both the 70-200 VR and the 300mm f2.8 and I think you would be real pleased if your added the 300 to your lens lineup.
     
  14. MontyDog

    MontyDog

    Jan 30, 2005
    #1064 - You have an error in your SQL syntax;
     
Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
Does clearance price of ZF 135 f2 imply Otis 135 is coming? Lens Lust Aug 7, 2017
Differences between the 28 f2 and 28 f2.8 AIS Lens Lust May 9, 2017
Where is the 200 f2 thread Lens Lust Mar 23, 2017
Nikon 35 f2 D problems Lens Lust Jul 17, 2016
Sigma 24-35 f2 Art Lens Lust Jul 2, 2016