p.1 #1 · AF speed on Nikon 70-200 f/4 vs. f/2.8 VRII
I had the chance to borrow the Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VRII lens a couple of times last year. I almost got one until I saw the f/4 version. In reading reviews and opinions, I have yet to see anything where someone compared the AF speed between the two. If the f/4 is very close or the same as the f/2.8, I'm going to grab one. I do a lot of action shots, so AF speed is critical for me. Anyone on here have a comparison between the two? Thanks.
p.1 #2 · AF speed on Nikon 70-200 f/4 vs. f/2.8 VRII
Pretty sure they are comparable but what type.of action shooting are you doing?? It's all about fast lense and if you are doing lots of indoor shooting, I wouldn't go with the f4!! I will rent the 200 f2 in a few weeks not that is the lens for sports!! Way faster af then 70-200 and no focus breathing, sharp, beautiful color and bokeh and the price tag to go along with it!! :-P
p.1 #3 · AF speed on Nikon 70-200 f/4 vs. f/2.8 VRII
I have used the f/4 and I have the 2.8 vrII, I have to admit af in good light is very close. But in low-light, you have the 1 stop advantage of the 2.8, which is a big deal for me. VR is also silent on the f/4.0 and even better than on the 2.8. If money is no problem: go for the 2.8. But when you want an amazing lens that is more reasonably priced, f/4.0 is the way to go. (btw the 2.8 is now 300$ off!!!, would go for that one )
p.1 #4 · AF speed on Nikon 70-200 f/4 vs. f/2.8 VRII
I looked at both this week in my transition. I'll say both are incredibly fast focusing and the f4 had a really good feel to to it. However, I believe it is $1300 and the tripod ring is $250, so $1550 altogether. As mentioned above the 2.8 is $2100 after rebate, so for $500 you get the faster lens. Would be and was my pick.
p.1 #5 · AF speed on Nikon 70-200 f/4 vs. f/2.8 VRII
I have both. In good light there is not much difference (in fact the 70-200/4 might be a hair faster). In low light the 70-200/4 hesitates and is less accurate (but is still very good) and the f/2.8 is definitely faster and more accurate.
p.1 #6 · AF speed on Nikon 70-200 f/4 vs. f/2.8 VRII
bipock wrote:
I looked at both this week in my transition. I'll say both are incredibly fast focusing and the f4 had a really good feel to to it. However, I believe it is $1300 and the tripod ring is $250, so $1550 altogether. As mentioned above the 2.8 is $2100 after rebate, so for $500 you get the faster lens. Would be and was my pick.
I got my Nikon tripod collar for $159 . . . . so I would not handicap it quite that much.
I have both because sometimes f/2.8 just is needed in low light while most of the time the low weight and reduced size of the f/4 wins out. Also f/4 at 200mm is usually plenty thin DOF for what I do with it.
)