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      
3
       end
  

Archive 2017 · will you still buy the 200 f/2 if you have the new 105f/1.4 and 70-200E

  
 
agelessphotog
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #1 · p.3 #1 · will you still buy the 200 f/2 if you have the new 105f/1.4 and 70-200E


We shoot 95% high school seniors. I personally wouldn't want to give up the 2.0 on the 200 F2, not just for the bokeh but also when the sun started to drop, it helped. We recently bought the 105 1.4E and while I love it, the 200 F2 produces better images to me. Not a lot better, but the difference is there. I'm still glad we bought the 105 though, when our busy season picks up sometimes we do shoots every day and my arms need a break from that 200 F2. But IMO I wouldn't want to have to shoot at 2.8... I know for some people it's not a big deal but I like shooting at 2.0 or 1.4


Feb 12, 2017 at 12:43 PM
agelessphotog
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #2 · p.3 #2 · will you still buy the 200 f/2 if you have the new 105f/1.4 and 70-200E


I would do some comparison shots with the 105 1.4E vs the 200 F2 on my next shoot but i'm sure it's already been done. I'm going to go try to find some 200 vs 70-200 F2.8E comparisons, a real shoot, not a mannequin.


Feb 12, 2017 at 12:47 PM
agelessphotog
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #3 · p.3 #3 · will you still buy the 200 f/2 if you have the new 105f/1.4 and 70-200E


Elijah wrote:
Former 200/2 owner here.
The minute 105E was announced, I posted the 200/2 for sale. True story.

I'm a wedding photographer.
Had I quit shooting weddings, I'd sell the 105E for a 200/2 again.


Really? I love having both. There are definitely some urban shoots we do where there are tighter spots where you just can't use the 200 and the 105 works perfect.



Feb 12, 2017 at 12:58 PM
rico
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #4 · p.3 #4 · will you still buy the 200 f/2 if you have the new 105f/1.4 and 70-200E


la puffin wrote:
All that being said, for what you shoot, I'd stay with the 70-200/2.8E and 105/1.4, as 200mm might be too long - that would be my concern if $ is a concern. F1.4 is going to be great for separation for portraits. On the other hand, we only live once. Buy a 200 used and if it is a burden, you can always turn it around for what you paid for it.

Thank you, la puffin, for making my choice clear—clear as mud. I totally agree that a short tele zoom is essential kit, and have the 70-200/4 FX and 55-200 DX (both usable uncropped on FX BTW). I have a 200/2 in another mount and consider it a specialty lens but, as you say, we only live once. While I respect the 105/1.4, it's unlike to join my stable soon.



Feb 12, 2017 at 06:42 PM
No Regrets
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #5 · p.3 #5 · will you still buy the 200 f/2 if you have the new 105f/1.4 and 70-200E


sandy27000 wrote:
I am a hobbyist, have the 58 f1.4 and the 105 f1.4 along with the 70-200 f2.8E. The only reason I'm not getting the 200 f2 is that it's awkward to carry around for general photography, too big to take anywhere really if you're not a pro. Any hobbyists out there who are using it?


I'm a hobbyist and absolutely love my 200f2vrII. I'll admit that I found it to be a little awkward at first, but then I switched out the stock lens foot for the Hejnar Lens foot. Not only is it incredibly well made, but it allows me to use it as a handle... something that the original foot did not allow. Secondly, I bought the Sun-Sniper Rotoball Pro cross body sling which makes it so nice to carry with me all day.

PA193763 by Don Sawall, on Flickr

Is the lens heavy? Absolutely! But the image quality; the fast and accurate autofocus, the color, contrast, sharpness are all first rate! It's everything that every other lens tries to achieve!

Best wishes,
Don



Feb 12, 2017 at 07:13 PM
kshimz
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #6 · p.3 #6 · will you still buy the 200 f/2 if you have the new 105f/1.4 and 70-200E


I ended up selling my 58mm f/1.4G, 85mm f/1.4G, and 200mm f/2 for the 105mm f/1.4E and 70-200mm f/2.8E. As a wedding photographer, this setup makes more practical sense. The 200mm f/2 is a specialty lens, fantastic for portraits and indoor sports. It has a unique look, that I don't think any other lens can produce. My friend just bought the 200mm f/2, and is only posting shots from this lens on his own website, so prospective clients will hire him for that look/style. He also partners as a wedding photographer, so he is able to cater to other clients as well. Smart IMHO.


Feb 15, 2017 at 03:16 AM
playerofwar
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #7 · p.3 #7 · will you still buy the 200 f/2 if you have the new 105f/1.4 and 70-200E


It's not really a match between these two.

200mm has VR and blazing fast focussing. Amazing bokeh and look.
But it's heavy AF.

105mm is cheaper and is f/1.4.
Autofocus is very slow and has a love or hate bokeh.

I still have the 200 2.0 VR2, whilst the 105 is no more. If the autofocus was as good as the 200 2.0, I would own both.

Edited on Feb 16, 2017 at 07:17 AM · View previous versions



Feb 15, 2017 at 04:16 AM
twistacatz
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #8 · p.3 #8 · will you still buy the 200 f/2 if you have the new 105f/1.4 and 70-200E


hijazist wrote:
In an ideal world, the 58 1.4, 105 1.4 and the 200 F/2 makes a perfect trio


My personal "Holy Trinity".

I say get both but purchase the 105mm first as I'm sure you'll get more use out of it given it's portability. With all the drawbacks of owning the 200mm I don't think I can ever get rid of it.



Feb 15, 2017 at 08:59 AM
playerofwar
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #9 · p.3 #9 · will you still buy the 200 f/2 if you have the new 105f/1.4 and 70-200E


You can get a lot better deal than 4000$ on the 200 2.0.
I got my version 2 for less than 3300$ (looks brand new) and have seen several mint 200mm VR1's for under 2800$. Most of the time you are expected to pay around 500-700$ more for a version 2. Old and heavily used VR1's that sat unused for some time tend to lose the autofocus motor, which sets you back around 500$ if it ever happens. The VR1 is a 2004 lens, whilst the VR2 is introduced in 2010. I went for the VR2 because of parts availability if anything ever breaks. Nikon already replaced my mount retaining screw on my 200 VR2 for free.

My current 3-lens setup would be: 15-30 Tamron, 50 1.4 Sigma and 200 2.0 Nikon. With a D810 and a D500, there is almost nothing this setup cannot handle. I have done: Landscape, product photography, portrait, sports, journalism, streetlife, architecture, interior photography and documentary with just these 3 lenses. It has been months since the 24-70 and 70-200 have been mounted on my camera!



Feb 16, 2017 at 07:21 AM
beji
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #10 · p.3 #10 · will you still buy the 200 f/2 if you have the new 105f/1.4 and 70-200E


Thank you everyone for sharing your thoughts. Looks like I will go with the heavy/expensive route
Just spent almost 3K on the new 70-200E, that depleted the budget for now. Have to start saving for the 200f/2



Feb 16, 2017 at 10:04 AM
1       2      
3
       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       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.