$2399.95 70-200 VRII says CNET

[Tosh]

The "new" lens offerings do seem to be a bit underwhelming. Bodies, too, for that matter.

If user reports and reviews for the new 70-200vr suggest it takes a step up in quality (sharpness, microcontrast, bokeh) at all or most focal lengths, then I'd probably consider selling some of my gear to help fund one.
But I'd want to hear a few credible gushes that at times it approximates a 200vr. :wink: :smile:

 

[jklofft]

With 7 ED elements and a 4.5 feet minimum focus and better VR rounded diaphragm blades for smoother bokkeh. The new 70-200 2.8 ED VR 2 sounds like a winner. I just got to play with the old version :tongue: of the 70-200 2.8 AF VR for the first time today. I was impressed how fast it focused and it's lack of hunting in low room light. The captures where sharp. If the new one is even better, and Im sure it will be. Pro's will be jump all over it. The extra price is regrettable but not surprising. Besides, Nikon"needs" the money to make some fast primes like the 24 1.4 , 35 1.4 , ...oo

Those specs are not that much improved from the current model which MF to 4.6 and AF to 4.9 feet. The current model has a 9 blade rounded diaphram blades as well. One thing that I did notice is that the new model see "fatter" more like the older 80-200 (not in overall diameter, but the old model trims down in the middle a bit). Might just be the pics and we need to see them side-by-side.

 

[turtile]

Isn't the current retail price of the 70-200mm $2,295?

 

[Randy]

The "new" lens offerings do seem to be a bit underwhelming. Bodies, too, for that matter.

If user reports and reviews for the new 70-200vr suggest it takes a step up in quality (sharpness, microcontrast, bokeh) at all or most focal lengths, then I'd probably consider selling some of my gear to help fund one.
But I'd want to hear a few credible gushes that at times it approximates a 200vr. :wink: :smile:

u dozed off again

 

[Domdog31]

u dozed off again

more like crashed, lol.....

 

[wgilles]

what did you expect for it to be cheaper?? If someone really wants one people will find the money.

Btw I read ship date November? Surely one can save the price difference for the lens by then....if of course they want to

No. The new 18-200 is around the same price as the old one, I expect something like that. This lens is 600 dollars more than the current 70-200! That's not right...

When I joined this forum last April, the 70-200 was around $1400, I almost bought a used one for 1200

 

[wgilles]

Isn't the current retail price of the 70-200mm $2,295?

B&H has it for 1869

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/274780-GREY/Nikon_2139_70_200mm_f_2_8_VR_G_AFS.html

 

[Tosh]

The "new" lens offerings do seem to be a bit underwhelming. Bodies, too, for that matter.

If user reports and reviews for the new 70-200vr suggest it takes a step up in quality (sharpness, microcontrast, bokeh) at all or most focal lengths, then I'd probably consider selling some of my gear to help fund one.
But I'd want to hear a few credible gushes that at times it approximates a 200vr. :wink: :smile:

u dozed off again

Hey, ya never know! :biggrin:
I'm not sure too many of us expected the D3 sensor to be as special as it turned out to be.
Some of the early naysayers eventually bought a body with that sensor and now trumpet its virtues.
Gotta dream that a similar thing can happen with lens technology.
If not, so be it. I'll just kiss my sub-$1k AFS 80-200 that still takes awesome shots and pride myself on my financial prudence.

 

[Domdog31]

This lens is 600 dollars more than the current 70-200! That's not right...

Agreed!! But someone has to pay those mad scientists at Nikon

 

[wgilles]

Agreed!! But someone has to pay those mad scientists at Nikon

The "mad scientists" at Canon seem to be compensated well enough...

 

[Randy]

Agreed!! But someone has to pay those mad scientists at Nikon

it's $1k more than I paid for my 70-200 3 years ago and i got it new at b&h

 

[SP77]

All I have to say is............... :m36:

Randy my guess of $1999 was a "tad" off.

Boy am I glad I bought my now "old" 70-200VR for $800 less not even a year ago. I paid $1599 from B&H or Adorama at the time.

 

[Domdog31]

it's $1k more than I paid for my 70-200 3 years ago and i got it new at b&h

Crazy I know!

But 3 years ago there was no D3x, D3 or D700....

That $1k reflects the "optimization" for digital....yes people believe this

 

[Randy]

All I have to say is............... :m36:

Randy my guess of $1999 was a "tad" off.

Boy am I glad I bought my now "old" 70-200VR for $800 less not even a year ago. I paid $1599 from B&H or Adorama at the time.

I only missed it by $100 but I'm betting the price goes up past $2399 because of demand

 

[Etherized]

Just curious, what was the MSRP of the 70-200 VR when it was announced originally?

 

[danameless]

Nano Dust?

Isn't this what they used to kill the robots in I, Robot?

 

[SP77]

I only missed it by $100 but I'm betting the price goes up past $2399 because of demand

I dunno about that. I see lots of people balking. If you're a full-time pro and absolutely have to have the lens AND you're switching into the Nikon system then I guess, but at the same time the crazy pricing might be enough for the C->N switchers to just stay where they're at.

 

[Uncle Frank]

Buying the Trinity

14-24/2.8: $1,800 @ B&H
24-70/2.8: $1,770 @ B&H
70-200/2.8: $2,400
------------------------
Total: $5,970 :Curved:

Listing Nikon gear under your signature used to be a sign of good taste in optics, but at these prices, it will also be a symbol of conspicuous consumption.

They must be having parties at Tokina, Tamron, and Sigma.

 

[neimac]

Well that lens will likely never be in my signature. That's just crazy! I have a feeling Tokina, Tamron and Sigma will be doing pretty well by me in the future. lol

 

[Domdog31]

Buying the Trinity

14-24/2.8: $1,800 @ B&H
24-70/2.8: $1,770 @ B&H
70-200/2.8: $2,400
------------------------
Total: $5,970 :Curved:

Listing Nikon gear under your signature used to be a sign of good taste in optics, but at these prices, it will also be a symbol of conspicuous consumption.

They must be having parties at Tokina, Tamron, and Sigma.

The"Digital" Trinity with a D3 or D700 close to 10k. Dont get me started with the D3x combo...