Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

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

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
  

Archive 2013 · 70-200 vr1 vs vr2

  
 
jusbokeh
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · 70-200 vr1 vs vr2




Christian S wrote:
Great price, great lens. If you rely on it for any kind of income It wouldn't be a bad idea to send it in for a general check up. Is the lens mount tight? Is your autofocus accurate? The longer the used market goes with these VI 70-200's the more need for adjustments and possible new AF motors. For $1,050, it's a toss up on how many miles are on it and it is a worthy lens to drop some coin into for the long haul. Also be sure to clean your contacts regularly on both the lens and
...Show more
It was a 2008 serial number and purchase date. Afs and vr works fine. Guy was a older gentleman and had all the paperwork and boxes. Probably will send it into nikon come summertime for a checkup along with my d3.



Jan 05, 2014 at 09:51 AM
ckcarr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · 70-200 vr1 vs vr2


jusbokeh wrote:
It was a 2008 serial number and purchase date. Afs and vr works fine. Guy was a older gentleman and had all the paperwork and boxes. Probably will send it into nikon come summertime for a checkup along with my d3.


Ha Ha!

THAT will eliminate your savings!
Especially when they say "IMPACT DAMAGE!"



Jan 05, 2014 at 09:55 AM
Rags Hef
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · 70-200 vr1 vs vr2


Having the VR1 I agree with the comments posted

Purportedly the magnification range is different on the V1 vs V2.

I never use VR shooting sports needing fast focus, the VR always gets in the way

I always crop the keepers from burst shooting, so edge sharpness is not a problem on my D700

If I shot landscapes I would have a different opinion

Rags



Jan 05, 2014 at 10:00 AM
dougfatheruk
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · 70-200 vr1 vs vr2


I'm at a loss with all of the VR1 bashing, vignetting and FX seem to go hand in hand.

I get as much, if not more vignetting on my 24-70.

AF on the 70-200 VR1 is fast; sports, rock concerts, you name it, it's right there at the top.



Jan 05, 2014 at 06:54 PM
Frode
Offline
• •
[X]
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · 70-200 vr1 vs vr2


I never got the corners sharp with the VR I. Now, the VR II, that`s another story ;-)! Worth the money.....in my case, YES.


Jan 05, 2014 at 07:27 PM
m.sommers00
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · 70-200 vr1 vs vr2


jusbokeh wrote:
It was a 2008 serial number and purchase date. Afs and vr works fine. Guy was a older gentleman and had all the paperwork and boxes. Probably will send it into nikon come summertime for a checkup along with my d3.


As far as I know, Nikon warranty isn't transferable on cameras or lenses. Unless you have the original receipt without a name on it that might work!



Jan 05, 2014 at 07:54 PM
Stdon
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · 70-200 vr1 vs vr2


I have seen no reason to retire my VR at all. It's been fast accurate and sharp whether on DX or FX. I'd like to see this sever vignetting I hear about because I've never seen it on FX at all. It does everything well. Studio, headshots, weddings, events, university basketball, MotoGP, and very high speed sprint boats. There has never been an issue and I get published.


Jan 06, 2014 at 01:44 AM
itsky
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · 70-200 vr1 vs vr2


Can somebody point me to a thread that explains the focus breathing characteristics of the VRII? I am trying to search and coming up empty. Thank you!


Feb 27, 2014 at 12:46 PM
John Skinner
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · 70-200 vr1 vs vr2


Although you can tell by my previous posts in this thread I think this is a TOTAL 'feed them they will come' issue with the VRI being so low valued now as compared features vs. Costs vs. what you are actually getting.. The breathing issue was, and is another factor NOT to indulge on this orgy of the costant upgrading that talking heads tell you shoud be done for stupid issues..

Hell, I ADD a vignette to 75% of my shots !

And to address this last question, although I'm not a huge fanboy of people like Moose Peterson, DPReview, DXO, Thom, or that complete dolt... Kenny the camera idiot.

This Thom article seems to be 'farily unbiased and well rounded. At the very least, he explains the 'breathing issue' in layman's terms and covers it.

LINK TO THOM'S BREATHING EXPLANATION ON 70-200 VRI & VRII



Feb 27, 2014 at 01:01 PM
CanadaMark
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · 70-200 vr1 vs vr2


itsky wrote:
Can somebody point me to a thread that explains the focus breathing characteristics of the VRII? I am trying to search and coming up empty. Thank you!


Basically, what happens is the closer you are to your subject (or the lens' minimum focus distance (MFD)), the effective focal length is reduced or "breathes". Some lenses do this more than others. The trade off is the 70-200 VR2 is actually wider than the VR1 at MFD, so it works both ways to different degrees:


70-200 VR1
70mm @ MFD is really 80mm
70mm @ 10ft is really 75mm
70mm @ Infinity is really72mm
200mm @ MFD is really 182mm
200mm @ Infinity is really 196mm

70-200 VR2:
70mm @ MFD is really 70mm
70mm @ 10ft is really 72mm
70mm @ Infinity is really 72mm
200mm @ MFD is really 135mm
200mm @ Infinity is really 192mm

Beyond about 10 feet, BOTH lenses are fairly accurate to their focal length markings. It is only as you approach MFD do the lenses begin to "breathe" and reduce the effective focal length, the VR2 doing so more so than the VR1 as you reach MFD. You won't even notice this characteristic unless you shoot near the MFD of the longer focal lengths. If you do, then it's something to take into consideration. It's not as bad as some make it out to be, but there is a significant difference between 135 and 192mm, if you do a lot of work at MFD. Some even see it as an advantage, but at the end of the day, I do wish it was 200mm @ MFD more times than not.

Aside from that, the VR2 is superior to the VR1 in every single way. It focuses slightly faster, it is sharper (particularly toward the edges on FF cameras), it has noticeably better VR, less vignetting, nanocoating, and is physically shorter. I've owned both and while it makes less of a difference on a DX body, it is significantly better on a FF body if you can afford the price difference. I upgraded when I owned only DX bodies, and felt it was well worth the upgrade even then, for my taste. It is a no brainier on FX in my opinion, but lots of folks are getting great results with the VR1 still.



Feb 27, 2014 at 01:49 PM
Joseph.
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · 70-200 vr1 vs vr2


I'll make this quick

pixel peeper? VR2

not a pixel peeper and just want to take pics? VR1

Also, VR2 hood is junk...



Feb 27, 2014 at 02:58 PM
Jason_Brook
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · 70-200 vr1 vs vr2


DontShoot wrote:
I'll make this quick

pixel peeper? VR2

not a pixel peeper and just want to take pics? VR1

Also, VR2 hood is junk...


Pixel peeper should be defined as gear snob.



Feb 27, 2014 at 03:08 PM
CanadaMark
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · 70-200 vr1 vs vr2


DontShoot wrote:
I'll make this quick

pixel peeper? VR2

not a pixel peeper and just want to take pics? VR1

Also, VR2 hood is junk...



Jason_Brook wrote:
Pixel peeper should be defined as gear snob.


I respectfully disagree with that. Lots of people care about getting every last bit of sharpness or performance out of our equipment by buying the best, using proper technique, support, careful PP, etc. There's nothing wrong with that, especially if you're trying to offer the best possible product to a client, or if you print big, etc. Some people are also just more picky than others, not that there is a right or wrong way. I don't think of these people as pixel peepers or snobs.

You could argue that the other way too, if you don't care that much about sharpness, IQ, etc. and just want to snap some pics, why look at huge $1,000-2000 lenses at all? Why not just grab a P&S or D3000 and some kit zooms? (not that there is anything wrong with that either, I'm just using it as an example). There are lots of people who pay quite a bit of money for marginal improvements, since what may seem trivial to one person might make all the difference to the way another uses it. Using myself as a quick example, before I even had a FF camera, I was getting photos with the VR2 I could not with the VR1 simply because the VR was so much better.

More on topic, I also think the 70-200/4 is the best compromise. Unless you absolutely need F2.8, you save $1000, half the weight, hardly any focus breathing, and get the same image quality as the VR2, with better VR to boot. Nikon hit a home run with that one.



Feb 27, 2014 at 03:25 PM
itsky
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · 70-200 vr1 vs vr2


CanadaMark wrote:
Basically, what happens is the closer you are to your subject (or the lens' minimum focus distance (MFD)), the effective focal length is reduced or "breathes". Some lenses do this more than others. The trade off is the 70-200 VR2 is actually wider than the VR1 at MFD, so it works both ways to different degrees:

70-200 VR1
70mm @ MFD is really 80mm
70mm @ 10ft is really 75mm
70mm @ Infinity is really72mm
200mm @ MFD is really 182mm
200mm @ Infinity is really 196mm

70-200 VR2:
70mm @ MFD is really 70mm
70mm @ 10ft is really 72mm
70mm @ Infinity is really 72mm
200mm @ MFD is
...Show more

Thank you for taking time to put toghether a thoughtful post on the topic, interesting concept being reletively new to using good equipment and coming from using mostly primes. Thanks Again!



Feb 27, 2014 at 04:25 PM
bocajrs
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · 70-200 vr1 vs vr2


I sold my VR1 for the F4 and haven't looked back. The only issue that drove me bonkers with the VR1 was focusing ring would move all the time when set to AF.


Feb 27, 2014 at 04:29 PM
Kyyo24
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · 70-200 vr1 vs vr2


All the "severe vignetting" I've seen is minimal...I don't shoot landscape with this lens so corners don't concern me. I was in the same boat and went with the vr1 and couldn't be happier! I got mine for 1100 on Craigslist in mint condition. Do you shoot professionally or just as a hobby?


Feb 27, 2014 at 05:03 PM
j.liam
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · 70-200 vr1 vs vr2


There's a good piece by Lloyd Chambers, open access without subscription, that looks at the 70-200 v.1 shot years back on a D3X. Designed in the DX days, corners smear badly on FX. So depends on your uses; if corner sharpness isn't critical and vignetting a plus, then it should serve you well.


Feb 27, 2014 at 08:17 PM
Nathan Padgett
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · 70-200 vr1 vs vr2


I've had both at the same time, and both are wonderful. However, the VR2 is better imho.

The VR1 does vignette and sometimes severely depending on the aperture and focal length.

To me the biggest value in the VR2 is the VR is actually a lot better. Easily two stops better. Also, the VR2 doesn't flare as easily as the VR1. Probably due to the magical nano coating.

Finally the prices used are not $1000 different. Usually in good condition the used prices are closer to $600-700. Also keep in mind, the VR2 is going to have newer electronics/focus motors. They do wear out eventually.



Feb 27, 2014 at 08:53 PM
1      
2
       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.