1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

70-200 Mark II: $440 for sharp corners?

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by sir oliver, Jul 30, 2009.

  1. OK, let's compare the prices first:

    Old 70-200 VR: $ 1.899,95 (B&H Photo)
    New 70-200 VRII: $2.339,95 (suggested retail price); roughly $440 more expensive than the old one

    What will you get for your $440 over the old one?

    Let's wait to see it tested, but you can expect:
    1. sharp corners on FX (and no vignetting on FX)
    2. better flare & ghost control, due to Nano coating
    3. even more effective VR
    4. just maybe: slight sacrifice in wide-open performance in the center, to gain the edge-to-edge sharpness?

    Everything else on the old one was so good that it is hard to expect other improvements.

    Arguably, the weakest point of the old one was soft corners on FX, which should only bother landscape and architecture shooters.
    Despite all the negative bias, the old one was not only a great lens for DX shooters, but also for all FX shooters who do not use it for landscape and architecture work (and majority or photographers use a 70-200mm for portrait, sports and PJ work anyway).

    So now that the 70-200 MkII is finally here, it can be expected that the bashing of the old 70-200 will finally stop, as people will realize the choices that you have:

    1. buy the old one, spare the $440, and have a top-notch portrait, sports and PJ telezoom, or
    2. add the $440, and buy yourself all the above + sharp corners on FX, if your shooting style really needs sharp corners in the 70-200mm range
     
  2. It all depends on how you look at it.

    $400 more over the life of owning this lens is very inexpensive.

    The last one was produced in 2003 and I purchased one for $1700. It now goes for $300 more. I can sell it for $1300, so it only cost me $400 to own it for 6 years.

    Also $400 over 6 years is only $67 a year more.

    I would buy the new version in a heartbeat.

    GenoP
     
  3. Now the "digital" trinity is REALLY complete.....
     
  4. LSSE

    LSSE Guest

    If I were in the market for one, I'd get one if I made income from it. as a hobby, I won't shell out more than 2k for it. Unless it is ridiculously better than anything else (read 14-24 leap forward). I could then be convinced to get it as I know I'd keep it for 6-10 years at the least.
     
  5. It also looks like the tripod mount has been improved over the old 70-200VR.

    Unfortunately, my bank account has not been improved as well.

    And I'm happy with my 80-200 AFS.
     
  6. wgilles

    wgilles

    Apr 25, 2008
    NJ
    I'm going to get a used 70-200 when everyone starts selling theirs to get this new one!
     
  7. Wouldn't count on it.....
     
  8. wgilles

    wgilles

    Apr 25, 2008
    NJ
    Well, not everyone, but I guarantee those with the money will do it.
     
  9. of course - you might be able to snag a deal...but maybe by November the reviews will be out from Thom and K.Rock and whomever and maybe the lenses will be so well reviewed and so hard to get....people will be forced to hold on to them....

    Who knows and only time will tell
     
  10. breadfan35

    breadfan35

    159
    Nov 23, 2007
    Dallas Texas
    If it performs from edge to edge, I'll be getting one. I plan to wait and see some real world test shots first rather than pre-order it. I do expect it to perform though and I'll be willing to pay for it. Especially considering that I'll be able to sell my current one.

    But since my current model works very well, I'll stick with it for now. No rush. :) 
     
  11. i dont plan on getting one...too long and heavy for traveling! or mayble i'll get one and deal with the weight...anybody take on traveling before? (months of traveling? not a week!
     
  12. danameless

    danameless

    May 9, 2009
    NYC
    I'm with you, hoping to pick one up for around $1,200 :biggrin:
     
  13. SP77

    SP77

    Jun 4, 2007
    Rockville, MD
    from the MTF charts of the new vs old the new one does seem to be better in the corners, but it's still not "macro" perfect. Maybe it'll be good enough for those wanting improvements.
     
  14. where are you getting this info?
     
  15. SP77

    SP77

    Jun 4, 2007
    Rockville, MD
    Here: http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/lens/af/zoom/index.htm

    70-200 VR: http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/lens/af/zoom/af-s_vr_zoom70-200mmf_28g_if/index.htm
    70-200 VR II: http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/lens/af/zoom/af-s_70-200mmf_28g_vr2/index.htm


    Even the new one still shows significant softening in the corners, although it's definitely improved. Compare it to the 60mm and 200mm Micros and the brick wall shooters are still going to be disappointed I think (which is why I've continually suggested that if brick wall type subjects are your thing you ought to be using a macro which are designed for that - perfectly flat focusing fields and edge to edge sharpness - and not a telephoto zoom optimized for sports, photojournalism, and portraiture where edge performance isn't really a concern).
     
  16. I just got the 70-200 and have until today to return it without penalty. Given that B&H's price will be less than MSRP is it worth it to return it, wait for three months, and spend may $250 more if I shoot DX?
     
  17. Paulesko

    Paulesko

    90
    Jul 23, 2008
    Spain
    The important thing is that the corners improve at f8 or so. You ""need soft corners to have good bokeh"" so I think it´s logical that the sharpness in the corners at f2.8 is not going to be very good, but I expect it to have really good corners from f8 to f16.
     

  18. Wait, what:confused:  Bokeh has nothing to do with corner sharpness nor any sharpness for the matter. I was under the impression that the blades first and foremost control bokeh
     
  19. mosier

    mosier

    175
    Apr 29, 2008
    NYC
    I'd say if you shoot DX and plan to stay with DX, keep the one you just bought. If your not shooting brick walls and landscapes you'll be more then happy with the original 70-200. I shoot portraits primarily and can tell you without hesitation that the original is hands down my favorite lens, surpassing the 85mm 1.4 and the 24-70mm 2.8. I do love those lenses as well, but man what the 70-200 does for me is amazing. Will be using the still perfect for portraits on FX 70-200mm VR I for years to come :biggrin:

    Cheers,
    Jeff
     
  20. Weston

    Weston

    674
    Dec 29, 2008
    Springfield, OR
    I would get the new one if I had the money. Do you plan on going FX anytime in the future?
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.