CanadaMark Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
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.
|