Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              38      
39
       40       41       42       end
  

The Nikon 200mm f/2 Thread - part 2
  
 
hijazist
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.39 #1 · The Nikon 200mm f/2 Thread - part 2


brodik.petr wrote:
II don't think anyone will bother proving you wrong, because they all know you are.


This should be a sticky, couldn't have said it any better...

Will, don't feed him. That's not the first time he trolled on this thread.



Jul 02, 2014 at 10:09 PM
DontShoot
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.39 #2 · The Nikon 200mm f/2 Thread - part 2


jamesmorophoto wrote:
then prove me wrong....

the photo: ramkumar999 posted above honestly doesn't look like anything a 70-200 couldn't achieve.

even your photo: not really blowing me away for a $6000 lens unless that background is a few feet from her.

I could get the same separation from an 85 just by shooting when she's farther away from the background.

I would really love someone w/ both lenses to come on here and do a side-by-side comparison at 200mm of the same subject, and the same distance to subject.

I've seen a few photos on here that are amazing (mainly by the guy w/ the manual focus
...Show more

Well, we don't have to convince you to buy it... we don't work for Nikon
If you think it's not worth it, then don't buy. Simple.
I've gotten tired of explaining what the 200 f/2 can do that the 70-200 VRII and 85 1.4 cannot. Here and at Nikoncafe. My advice is to just rent it and see for yourself.

It's kinda like the people who keep insisting that the 50 1.8G can do what the 58 1.4G can do, for a whole lotta less, just by looking at sample images online. You simply can't convince these people otherwise.






  NIKON D4    200.0 mm f/2.0 lens    200mm    f/2.0    1/1600s    200 ISO    0.0 EV  




Jul 02, 2014 at 10:36 PM
Picture This!
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.39 #3 · The Nikon 200mm f/2 Thread - part 2


that's a great shot Joseph.


Jul 02, 2014 at 11:15 PM
Picture This!
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.39 #4 · The Nikon 200mm f/2 Thread - part 2


jamesmorophoto wrote:
then prove me wrong....

the photo: ramkumar999 posted above honestly doesn't look like anything a 70-200 couldn't achieve.

even your photo: not really blowing me away for a $6000 lens unless that background is a few feet from her.

I could get the same separation from an 85 just by shooting when she's farther away from the background.

I would really love someone w/ both lenses to come on here and do a side-by-side comparison at 200mm of the same subject, and the same distance to subject.

I've seen a few photos on here that are amazing (mainly by the guy w/ the manual focus
...Show more

I have owned the 85/1.4 and 70-200/2.8 VR2 and VR1. The 200/2 ais ed that I purchased blow all of them out of the water for bokeh and focus-to-oof transition. The ais has lower contrast than the other two but that's a welcome thing for me for portraits and gives me flexibility in post to do what I want. I dont shoot sports or fast moving subjects so the ais version is everything I could ask for in a 200/2 lens.

Now if you can't tell the difference between the 70-200/2.8 or 85/1.4 from the 200 consider yourself very fortunate and save the money. Unfortunately for me, I can tell a 200/2 shot from the rest from a couple of miles away.




Jul 02, 2014 at 11:25 PM
brodik.petr
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.39 #5 · The Nikon 200mm f/2 Thread - part 2


Picture This! wrote:
if you can't tell the difference between the 70-200/2.8 or 85/1.4 from the 200 consider yourself very fortunate and save the money


Haha, this also needs a highlight!


agentbird wrote:
Here are a couple of casual shots, not overly processed, just quick snaps of friends.


We need more male shots in here, the 200mm compression suits them so well! Wish my friends looked as manly as yours


Edited on Jul 03, 2014 at 12:28 AM · View previous versions



Jul 03, 2014 at 12:13 AM
brodik.petr
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.39 #6 · The Nikon 200mm f/2 Thread - part 2


After seeing the awesome portraits by Joseph and agentbird, I gotta try to go with the flow

The pic looks a bit surreal, there was an extremely golden sunset after a storm last weekend:






Jul 03, 2014 at 12:21 AM
DontShoot
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.39 #7 · The Nikon 200mm f/2 Thread - part 2


Picture This! wrote:
that's a great shot Joseph.


Thank you sir.

I do have a wedding to shoot this weekend, and it's gonna be 200 f/2 all the way. This lens is so good I don't even own a 70-200 anymore.



Jul 03, 2014 at 12:52 AM
jamesmorophoto
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.39 #8 · The Nikon 200mm f/2 Thread - part 2


brodik.petr wrote:
After seeing the awesome portraits by Joseph and agentbird, I gotta try to go with the flow

The pic looks a bit surreal, there was an extremely golden sunset after a storm last weekend: http://s25.postimg.org/iblbsw1cv/BRD_8080.jpg


great photo Petr

I saw a few examples of the old nikon 135DC on your Facebook page that had very similar bokeh.

Can you post a few comparisons?



Jul 03, 2014 at 01:10 AM
DontShoot
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.39 #9 · The Nikon 200mm f/2 Thread - part 2


Ok here are two shots of my kids comparing the 200 f/2 vs 85 1.4G both wide open. They are standing on the same spot but I have to move further away with the 200 f/2 to maintain the framing. If you can't see the difference in rendering then perhaps a trip to the eye doc is in order The 200 f/2 basically made the 85 1.4G look like a cheap kit lens.




  NIKON D800E    200mm    f/2.0    1/250s    6400 ISO    0.0 EV  






  NIKON D800E    85mm    f/1.4    1/80s    1600 ISO    0.0 EV  




Jul 03, 2014 at 01:11 AM
jamesmorophoto
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.39 #10 · The Nikon 200mm f/2 Thread - part 2


DontShoot wrote:
Well, we don't have to convince you to buy it... we don't work for Nikon
If you think it's not worth it, then don't buy. Simple.
I've gotten tired of explaining what the 200 f/2 can do that the 70-200 VRII and 85 1.4 cannot. Here and at Nikoncafe. My advice is to just rent it and see for yourself.

It's kinda like the people who keep insisting that the 50 1.8G can do what the 58 1.4G can do, for a whole lotta less, just by looking at sample images online. You simply can't convince these people otherwise.




I'm simply asking b/c i've only found 2 comparisons online of the 70-200 and the 200 f2, but neither of them show photos taken at the same distance to subject.

Do any of you that have both lenses care to do a comparison. I'm sure the SEO benefits to your blog alone would be worth it. There are tons of threads of people asking for this information, and only 2 poor comparisons.

*edit: also feel free to share photos taken with the 200 f2 and a 135. Everything I've seen of the 135 is EXTREMELY close to the 200 in terms of bokeh and compression

Of course I know the 200 f2 looks better than the 85. no shit sherlock. But does it look $4000 better than a 135 f2 or the 200mm end of a 70-200? I don't care about your 85 to 200 comparisons.

lets see 200f2 to 70-200 vr ii or 135 f2..... I the bet differences aren't that striking...especially compared to a 135...



Jul 03, 2014 at 01:13 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



DontShoot
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.39 #11 · The Nikon 200mm f/2 Thread - part 2



Of course I know the 200 f2 looks better than the 85. no shit sherlock. I don't care about your 85 to 200 comparisons.


hmm you asked for it... here:

jamesmorophoto wrote:
I could get the same separation from an 85 just by shooting when she's farther away from the background.




lets see 200f2 to 70-200 vr ii or 135 f2..... I the bet differences aren't that striking...especially compared to a 135...


I actually have comparison images for these, but because of your attitude, I'd rather not help you out.
Have fun with Google!



Jul 03, 2014 at 01:33 AM
Picture This!
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.39 #12 · The Nikon 200mm f/2 Thread - part 2


He posted the 85 vs 200 as you asked about it. So now you don't care about the 85 ? :-)

I can do a comparison between the canon 135 vs 200 ais Nikon as those are the only ones I own. Petr can speak to the 135dc better as I only tried it briefly. The 200 is sharper wide open and has much better bokeh transition at any distance. My 135 was soft wide open.



Jul 03, 2014 at 01:41 AM
NightOwl Cat
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.39 #13 · The Nikon 200mm f/2 Thread - part 2


THIS thread is for any of the 200 f/2 Nikon lens shot on any NIKON branded cameras, film, FX, DX, or CX. Not an 85, not a 135.

Feel free to start your own thread asking for the comparisons. Better yet, rent the lenses YOU want and make YOUR own comparisons so that the test matches the way YOU shoot, since you apparently do not like other people's shots.

http://www.lensrentals.com
http://www.borrowlenses.com

are two places YOU can rent lenses, for starters.




jamesmorophoto wrote:
I'm simply asking b/c i've only found 2 comparisons online of the 70-200 and the 200 f2, but neither of them show photos taken at the same distance to subject.

Do any of you that have both lenses care to do a comparison. I'm sure the SEO benefits to your blog alone would be worth it. There are tons of threads of people asking for this information, and only 2 poor comparisons.

*edit: also feel free to share photos taken with the 200 f2 and a 135. Everything I've seen of the 135 is EXTREMELY close to the 200 in terms of
...Show more




Jul 03, 2014 at 01:49 AM
brodik.petr
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.39 #14 · The Nikon 200mm f/2 Thread - part 2


It's foolish to compare or rate lenses based solely on pictures you see on the internet. First of all what matters is the handler of the lens, not the lens itself. And also if you look at final processed images, any lens can blow your mind. Most experienced photographers that went through many lenses will tell you that.

As much as I don't feel like endulging anyone with his behaviour, I gotta confirm that even the 200/2 AiS is far superior to the 135/2 AF DC. Since the 200/2 AF-S should be superior to the 200/2 AiS, you can do the maths. And of course the difference isn't that striking. Most lenses above 105 mm have similar character. Bokeh-wise anything from 135 mm looks a lot alike, even monsters like 400 or 600 mm. But as I said earlier, there are much more important aspects to pro lenses than bokeh. Main reasons I got rid of 135/2 for 200/2 was better sharpness and quite a big difference in compression and subject separation.



Jul 03, 2014 at 01:55 AM
NightOwl Cat
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.39 #15 · The Nikon 200mm f/2 Thread - part 2


James,
here you go



Jul 03, 2014 at 02:14 AM
jamesmorophoto
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.39 #16 · The Nikon 200mm f/2 Thread - part 2


sorry for trying to gain some useful information from you guys...

just continue your circle jerking as planned....



Jul 03, 2014 at 05:34 AM
agentbird
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.39 #17 · The Nikon 200mm f/2 Thread - part 2


I tried to give you some useful information. Before I got the 200mm the 85mm 1.4G was my most used lens, and sort of still is as it's a little more versatile in it's length. But if there is room for it, I will withouth a doubt use the 200mm.

The only downsides to the 85mm is it's not the fastes focusing and it suffers, quite badly, from CA when shot wide open. But it's plenty sharp and yields fantastic results when used correctly. I've tried to force some CA from the 200, and I havent been able to, that's pretty amazing in my eyes.

But it's not as versatile as a 70-200, and the 70-200 VR2 is an amazing lens that I have used quite a lot. I recently sold it to fund my second 200mm, so I can't give you some examples. Fortunately for me I usually have time to use primes mostly for my kind of work.
If I were a wedding shooter, I think I would have both in my kit, but a 70-200 would be first priority.

Luckily I don't do weddings!



Jul 03, 2014 at 08:22 AM
James R
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.39 #18 · The Nikon 200mm f/2 Thread - part 2


agentbird wrote:
I tried to give you some useful information. Before I got the 200mm the 85mm 1.4G was my most used lens, and sort of still is as it's a little more versatile in it's length. But if there is room for it, I will withouth a doubt use the 200mm.

The only downsides to the 85mm is it's not the fastes focusing and it suffers, quite badly, from CA when shot wide open. But it's plenty sharp and yields fantastic results when used correctly. I've tried to force some CA from the 200, and I havent been able to, that's pretty
...Show more

You are the first person who I've read state the 85 1.4 G suffers badly from CA. In my experience and all lab tests I've read, it handles it quite well.



Jul 03, 2014 at 08:44 AM
agentbird
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.39 #19 · The Nikon 200mm f/2 Thread - part 2


I haven't read any lab tests, but I feel it suffers quite badly from it. Some places harder to remove in post than others. Especially wet asfalt/tarmac is an issue which is hard to eliminate CA. I'll see if I have any examples laying around.


Jul 03, 2014 at 09:39 AM
agentbird
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.39 #20 · The Nikon 200mm f/2 Thread - part 2


Here is a quick shout just out my window. It is a little over exposed, but sometimes that's how I would expose pictures, especially backlit portraits.

CA_TEST by AntonSoggiu, on Flickr



Jul 03, 2014 at 09:51 AM
1       2       3              38      
39
       40       41       42       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              38      
39
       40       41       42       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password