Nikkor Mid-Range Zoom Telephoto Shootout

[Dave]

Here is the lineup for the shootout that's going to be happening over the next 7 days (as I find time):

Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8 AF-S (my lens)
Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 AF-S VR (rented)
Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 AF-S VR II (rented)

Here they all are lined up side by side with hoods inverted.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

And with hoods on.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Dave]

Just did a quick preliminary test here in the office before I leave for the day. All three of these lenses are super sharp and pretty awesome. The 70-200 VR I is the longest of the bunch (as you can see in the above shot) and the 80-200 AF-S is the roundest (fattest) of the bunch. They're all about the same weight though. The new 70-200 VR II handles a lot like the 80-200 AF-S which I like since I never could get used to the long skinny feel of the 70-200 VR I.

The shots are uploading and I'll post them here soon. The shots are straight from the camera and I'm not even going to crop (but I will post links to the full size .jpgs).

 

[socrreferee]

Dave,
Thanks for doing this. I have the both the old and the new 70-200 VR. I plan to do try and get out this weekend and shoot both to see if for what I do it's really worth it to step up to the new lens.
Looking forward to seeing your results and getting your impressions.
Mark

 

[Dave]

First test is a perspective test from different focal lengths. I had the camera set to Aperture priority and I let the shutter speed set itself as these were shot from a fixed position (sitting on a very sturdy table with timer release). I notice that the 80-200 shutter speeds were a little different than the two 70-200 lenses, but the images look just about the same so I chalk that up to the natural light coming through the window changing.

All exif data is present on the full size images. These were shot with the D700 and with ISO 200 set.

Distance to Baseball from Lens = ~7 feet

Distance from Baseball to Wall behind it = ~9 feet.

80mm @ f/2.8
70-200 VR I Full Size

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

70-200 VR II Full Size

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

80-200 AF-S Full Size

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Dave]

105mm @ f/2.8
70-200 VR I Full Size

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

70-200 VR II Full Size

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

80-200 AF-S Full Size

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Dave]

135mm @ f/2.8
70-200 VR I Full Size

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

70-200 VR II Full Size

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

80-200 AF-S Full Size

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Dave]

200mm @ f/2.8
70-200 VR I Full Size

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

70-200 VR II Full Size

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

80-200 AF-S Full Size

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Dave]

100% crop of the 200mm shots above.

70-200 VR I

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

70-200 VR II

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

80-200 AF-S

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[alemmo]

wow that is a major difference and I can see why many are not like the VRII now especially for portraits. You examples at 200mm seal the deal. look at the out of focus bankground you can create with the VRI and old AF-S compared to the new VRII.

can't we just send our 80-200mm's in to Nikon and have them put VR on them and call it a day That would be the perfect lens in my opinion.

 

[GBNova]

Great comparison Dave, tks.

 

[Tosh]

Dave,

Thanks for the tests.
They confirm the results I got when I ran some comparisons.
This test shows how the two older zooms blow out the background better than the new zoom at this 7 ft. distance.

You'll be my hero if you conduct tests to show the distance at which the shortening effect disappears. :smile:
From my tests (100 ft -- no effect) and Jonathan's test (60 ft -- slight effect), it's probably in the 70-80 ft range.

 

[Michael Mohrmann]

Did you have the D700's in-camera vignetting control turned off for these images? By default, this feature is set to "normal".

 

[Uncle Frank]

Too bad you couldn't include a 70-300vr in the test.

 

[Dave]

wow that is a major difference and I can see why many are not like the VRII now especially for portraits. You examples at 200mm seal the deal. look at the out of focus bankground you can create with the VRI and old AF-S compared to the new VRII.

can't we just send our 80-200mm's in to Nikon and have them put VR on them and call it a day That would be the perfect lens in my opinion.

Glad I can help. I enjoy doing things like this...now for some real world testing this weekend (if the sun will ever come out).

Great comparison Dave, tks.

Anytime...

 

[alemmo]

Glad I can help. I enjoy doing things like this...now for some real world testing this weekend (if the sun will ever come out).



Anytime...

good work, and look forward to seeing more samples. It looks like this new lens will be perfect for outdoors stuff, landscape etc, but a horrible downgrade for wedding and event, and portrait shooters. The problem is a i do a little of both.

Not sure if this lens is worth the $2400 to me... again why not just put VR on my 80-200mm AF-S ... come on NIKON PLEASE :smile:

 

[alemmo]

Too bad you couldn't include a 70-300vr in the test.

i don;'t think the 70-300mm VR would fare to well at 2.8 For portability and value I think it has all 3 beat though :wink:

 

[thrdprophet]

Thanks Dave for the comparisons. Seems to me like the 70-200 is much sharper than the 80-200 in the 100% crop compario. I don't see the point of comparing the 70-200 V1 to the VII since it's obvious from your tests these are totally two seperate lenses. This just proves more that the VI has better bokeh than the VII.

 

[Dave]

Dave,

Thanks for the tests.
They confirm the results I got when I ran some comparisons.
This test shows how the two older zooms blow out the background better than the new zoom at this 7 ft. distance.

You'll be my hero if you conduct tests to show the distance at which the shortening effect disappears. :smile:
From my tests (100 ft -- no effect) and Jonathan's test (60 ft -- slight effect), it's probably in the 70-80 ft range.

I'll try to do some outdoor shots this weekend if I can to test it out. I'll find out the exact distance if I can...I may have to use my tape measure though. :biggrin:

Did you have the D700's in-camera vignetting control turned off for these images? By default, this feature is set to "normal".

Ahh, I completely forgot about that settings. I had it set to "low" which I think is what I originally set it to as I don't mind a bit of vignetting and I do get it with the 80-200. I've just turned if off and will leave it that way for the rest of my tests.

Too bad you couldn't include a 70-300vr in the test.

I used to have one UF, but I sold it. Dangit! I wish I still had my 80-200 AF-D too!

 

[Dave]

good work, and look forward to seeing more samples. It looks like this new lens will be perfect for outdoors stuff, landscape etc, but a horrible downgrade for wedding and event, and portrait shooters. The problem is a i do a little of both.

Not sure if this lens is worth the $2400 to me... again why not just put VR on my 80-200mm AF-S ... come on NIKON PLEASE :smile:

I know what you mean. I dont' think it's worth it for me to upgrade (I don't have a lens with VR and I probably never would use it) and it might not be for others. It's amazing how different of a lens it is though. I do like how it feels in my hand though.

Thanks Dave for the comparisons. Seems to me like the 70-200 is much sharper than the 80-200 in the 100% crop compario. I don't see the point of comparing the 70-200 V1 to the VII since it's obvious from your tests these are totally two seperate lenses. This just proves more that the VI has better bokeh than the VII.

Yes, the 70-200 (both of them) are sharper than my copy of the 80-200. I was thinking of getting the VR II over the 80-200, and while my 80-200 might not be quite AS sharp out of the camera, I can add a bit of sharpening in post and it looks great still. I hardly ever crop 100% with my 80-200 as I only use it when I am close and filling the viewfinder. If things are further away, the 300 f/2.8 comes out of the trunk (of my car). :biggrin:

 

[vibe2]

Great display