Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    748

    Nikkor 70-200 VR 1 vs VR II Comparison

    Another thread

    Came across a 70-200 VR 1 for sale, new, going for around 130 less than the VR 2. Comparisons i've researched indicate VR2 version has substantially improved ability to hand hold shoot with this, but a comparison I read on dpreview forum (that i googled..) indicates stepped down the VR1 takes the prize on optical quality where as the VR2 doesn't improve when stepped down. Comparison also mentioned the VR2 resolution is better and it vignetting less on FX.

    As I don't own an FX camera yet and will initially use on my D300 but later will probably use on an FX body, and also will be likely using this on a monopod and not tripod what do others feel is the better to go for?
    Last edited by Cyberwlf; 06-22-2010 at 05:19 PM.
    Cameras: Nikon D300, Panasonic Lumix G2, LX3 & FZ20
    Nikkor Lenses: 24-70mm f2.8 - 70-300mm VRII f4.5-5.6 - 50mm f1.4 G - 35mm f1.8 G - 50mm f1.8 - 18-200mm VR f3.5-5.6
    Other Lenses: Tokina: 11-16mm f2.8, Sigma: 17-70mm f2.8-4.5 Macro, Lumix: 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 & 20mm f1.7
    Other: Nikon SB 600, Vivitar 1/2/4 Close-up Lens, Cokin Graduated ND Filter and more...
    Computers/Software: MacBookPro 2.8ghz, Dell Latitude D630, Lexar CF UDMA FW800 Reader, Nikon Capture NX 1+2, Adobe Lightroom 1+2+3

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    391
    If I planed on staying with DX, I would absolutely pick up a VR1 version. I use mine on my FX and it's still one of my favorite lenses. I would like the new version but the few improvements don't justify the cost for me and I'm shooting FF.
    my flickr
    shutterdoggy.com
    nikon D700 | D200 | D50 - nikkor 17-35 f2.8 | 35-70 f2.8 | 70-200 f2.8 | 50 f1.8 | Tamron 28-75 f2.8 | 2@SB600 | SB-800

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    748
    When I do upgrade to FF at whatever point that is (...which i cant say i'm in a rush to do at present) I anticipate it will be something like the D700's replacement (when it comes out..), but the reason I am getting the 70-200 is all about getting great optics so even though any discounts is a nice bonus its not my primary focus either. Both versions seem to have their own pro's and con's from what I gather.
    Last edited by Cyberwlf; 06-22-2010 at 05:21 PM.
    Cameras: Nikon D300, Panasonic Lumix G2, LX3 & FZ20
    Nikkor Lenses: 24-70mm f2.8 - 70-300mm VRII f4.5-5.6 - 50mm f1.4 G - 35mm f1.8 G - 50mm f1.8 - 18-200mm VR f3.5-5.6
    Other Lenses: Tokina: 11-16mm f2.8, Sigma: 17-70mm f2.8-4.5 Macro, Lumix: 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 & 20mm f1.7
    Other: Nikon SB 600, Vivitar 1/2/4 Close-up Lens, Cokin Graduated ND Filter and more...
    Computers/Software: MacBookPro 2.8ghz, Dell Latitude D630, Lexar CF UDMA FW800 Reader, Nikon Capture NX 1+2, Adobe Lightroom 1+2+3

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    6,884
    130 pounds is not much to future proof a lens purchase. If I were in your position that's that way I would go.

    I love my 70-200VR1 on my D300 and have no intention of upgrading it for the Aus$1400.00 difference between what I'd get for it and what a new VR2 would cost but for an new purchase with only Aus$220 difference it would be VR2 every time.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Terra Australis Incognita
    Posts
    3,859
    Quote Originally Posted by k1w1 View Post
    130 pounds is not much to future proof a lens purchase. If i were in your position that's that way i would go.

    I love my 70-200vr1 on my d300 and have no intention of upgrading it for the aus$1400.00 difference between what i'd get for it and what a new vr2 would cost but for an new purchase with only aus$220 difference it would be vr2 every time.
    + 1 ...........
    D800, D300, D90, 24-70 f2.8, 70-200VR f2.8, 300 F4, 105 micro, 16-85VR, 50mm 1.8, Tammy 90 macro, 70-300VR, SB900, 2xSB600, MB-D10, 055XPROB 322RC2. New computers to run photoshop faster. C&C always appreciated. PhotoGallery
    Pressing the shutter is the start of the process - Joe McNally ... Buying the body is the start of the process - Dread Pirate

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Chicago, IL USA
    Posts
    935
    If you are a DX shooter, the VRI is probably one of the best pieces of glass you can attach the camera to. Unquestionably the leader in the 70-200 category. If you are a FX shooter, the VR1 still works great if you shoot anything other than landscapes. Only with landscapes do you notice the corner sharpness drop off relative to the VRII. If you use the lens for sports, or portraits, or anything else where there will be any bit of exploited depth of field, corner sharpness is irrelevant. The small bit of vignetting is also not very noticeable unless you are shooting the sky, and that can be corrected in camera or in post. Not only that, but many people intentionally add vignetting to shots in post to help emphasize their subject. I don't know of many people putting their subject right in the corner of the frame, but to each their own.

    I see the need for the VRII, but I don't see it as the lens that killed the VRI. I don't think you can judge the VRI's FX ability without trying it on FX for yourself. Weather that is owning it as a DX shooter moving up to FX, or being a FX shooter and renting the VRI for a couple days to try it out. Or being a DX shooter and renting a D700 and VRI together and trying it out.

    Regarding the "breathing" of the VRII, it can be rather significant at close focus. I believe Thom Hogan or DPReview did a comparison between the VRI and VRII lenses. You should be able to google that pretty easily.
    Nikon D300 | MB-D10 | Nikkor 12-24/4 | Nikkor 50/1.8 | Nikkor 70-200/2.8 VRI | Sigma 18-50/2.8 | SB-800 | SB-80DX (x4) | Radiopopper JrX Studio |

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    748
    I am leaning towards the VR2 at this point but there is something else i'd also read that slightly concerns me "One point to note is the considerable focus breathing this lens exhibits. At close distances you get less reach than expected." (seen this point written in a few different ways...but basically at closer distances the focal length is said to be equiv to 135mm effective), also different magnification ratio apparently.
    Cameras: Nikon D300, Panasonic Lumix G2, LX3 & FZ20
    Nikkor Lenses: 24-70mm f2.8 - 70-300mm VRII f4.5-5.6 - 50mm f1.4 G - 35mm f1.8 G - 50mm f1.8 - 18-200mm VR f3.5-5.6
    Other Lenses: Tokina: 11-16mm f2.8, Sigma: 17-70mm f2.8-4.5 Macro, Lumix: 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 & 20mm f1.7
    Other: Nikon SB 600, Vivitar 1/2/4 Close-up Lens, Cokin Graduated ND Filter and more...
    Computers/Software: MacBookPro 2.8ghz, Dell Latitude D630, Lexar CF UDMA FW800 Reader, Nikon Capture NX 1+2, Adobe Lightroom 1+2+3

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    748
    Anyone know more about or have experience with the issues listed in previous post?
    Cameras: Nikon D300, Panasonic Lumix G2, LX3 & FZ20
    Nikkor Lenses: 24-70mm f2.8 - 70-300mm VRII f4.5-5.6 - 50mm f1.4 G - 35mm f1.8 G - 50mm f1.8 - 18-200mm VR f3.5-5.6
    Other Lenses: Tokina: 11-16mm f2.8, Sigma: 17-70mm f2.8-4.5 Macro, Lumix: 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 & 20mm f1.7
    Other: Nikon SB 600, Vivitar 1/2/4 Close-up Lens, Cokin Graduated ND Filter and more...
    Computers/Software: MacBookPro 2.8ghz, Dell Latitude D630, Lexar CF UDMA FW800 Reader, Nikon Capture NX 1+2, Adobe Lightroom 1+2+3

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    6,884
    I don't think any regulars here to the best of my knowledge own a VR2.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    748
    Yeah I wasn't sure if anyone here did, but this forum is always my first stop for advice on all things Nikon.

    From what I gathered it meant that if you are standard at closer physical proximity to your subject (within allowable minimum focusing distances) then the image distortion / bokeh / field of view etc is similar to that of a 135mm lens when the lens is set to 200mm or 'you'd have to physically move about 3 feet closer to the subject to get the same framing' to quote someone. I believe this is a difference in manufacturing that is the cause there.
    Cameras: Nikon D300, Panasonic Lumix G2, LX3 & FZ20
    Nikkor Lenses: 24-70mm f2.8 - 70-300mm VRII f4.5-5.6 - 50mm f1.4 G - 35mm f1.8 G - 50mm f1.8 - 18-200mm VR f3.5-5.6
    Other Lenses: Tokina: 11-16mm f2.8, Sigma: 17-70mm f2.8-4.5 Macro, Lumix: 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 & 20mm f1.7
    Other: Nikon SB 600, Vivitar 1/2/4 Close-up Lens, Cokin Graduated ND Filter and more...
    Computers/Software: MacBookPro 2.8ghz, Dell Latitude D630, Lexar CF UDMA FW800 Reader, Nikon Capture NX 1+2, Adobe Lightroom 1+2+3

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •