jamach wrote:
jvarszegi, sounds like you are religious about the DP site, good for you, but why you are so sensitive about it is another issue, and why you need to bring in people's mothers into the equation is beyond me. Must be your lack of something. Probably not that you have no web site or profile, or pictures.
Joe
Pretty lame personal attack. You are a fanboy; I merely pointed it out. Perhaps I should have known better than to mess with the master of fake vignetting and selective colour, hmm?
... or maybe you should go away, since you like to engage in personal attacks.
The 70-200 f/2.8 appears to have problems on full frame sensors including at least vignetting (translating to more noise in the edges if corrected, probably not a big deal for many situations-- and see the surfer shot above where it helped the image) and edge/corner softness, as shown by unbiased reviewers including DPReview. If you don't like that, it sounds like a personal issue for you.
jamach wrote:
Some Canon reviewers found the lens to be somewhat soft at the perphery and got much press about that
Joe
Not quite true Joe, Bjørn Rørslett of Norway is one of the most respected Nikon person for Nikkor lens eveluations. Here is what he said about this lens:
"The centre sharpness is excellent even on the D3, but the tendency for the corners lacking critical sharpness when the lens is focused towards infinity at its longer end is unexpected and troublesome. For landscapes at 200 mm, you need to stop down way too far to get the corners just barely acceptable, even to f/22 in some cases."
And this was exactly what I found with this lens which has outstanding sharpness on the D3 except the corners which are important for landscape pictures.
Julius, are you saying the DPReview article on the lens did not get much press/attention? I am not sure of the point you make with your post. In a discussion spirit though, what Bjorn says is not an issue, just sounds like a point that others besides DPReview found the lens problematic.
I am not seeing options to the 70-200 with VR with F2.8, neither Sigma nor Tamron seem to want to enter the fray with stabilization. So what is a guy looking for a workhorse lens to do?
jamach wrote:
Julius, are you saying the DPReview article on the lens did not get much press/attention?
What Bjorn says is not an issue, just sounds like a point that others besides DPReviw found the lens problematic. To be complete, I am sure there are others who have reviewed the lens, so they should be included as well, huh?
GEEES!
Joe
Joe, I did not refer to Dpreview at all, I don't care too much about their lens evaluations.
On the other hand I give a lot of credit to Bjorn, but I was also referring to my personal experience for landscape pictures with this lens. The lack of corner sharpness on landscape type pictures bothered me so much that I had to sell the lens.
Since then I purchased the good old Nikkor 70-180 ED Micro lens (which I used to have from my previous Nikon years) and it does not have this problem on the D3. My 70-300 ED VR is also very good on the D3 with a lot better corner sharpness. I am not saying that the 70-300 ED VR as sharp as the 70-200 VR but not bad at all and it is a lot sharper in the corners of the full field sensor camera.
I wish Nikon would come out with something similar like the Canon 70-200 f/4L IS lens what I owned before (I would buy it in a heartbeat) which was the best lens in that range I ever had.
Otherwise I am very pleased with all my Nikon lenses I have.
Shaun Nyc wrote:
You can see it through the VF without taking a picture...happy testing
Well, it's certainly not visible through the viewfinder of my camera, nor is it visible on the rear LCD, but I can see a hint of corner darkening in shots taken at 2.8 at 200mm when I upload the files and view them on my 24" monitor. Stopping down to f4 pretty much eliminates it... certainly a *huge* improvement over my Canon L lenses.
molson wrote:
Well, they are either accurate - as you have stated - or they are not, which my example proves...
You've merely restated your stunning fallacy. A minor inaccuracy does not make for a major, wide-spread set of inaccuracies. An inaccuracy on an untested camera feature does not make for inaccuracy in a testing methodology.
Edited by jvarszegi on Jul 27, 2008 at 06:13 PM GMT
FYI, my Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS also has some vignetting on my 1Ds2 (FF/FX) so I don't think Nikon are alone in this. The vignetting tends to disappear at I stop down though.
molson wrote:
Well, it's certainly not visible through the viewfinder of my camera, nor is it visible on the rear LCD, but I can see a hint of corner darkening in shots taken at 2.8 at 200mm when I upload the files and view them on my 24" monitor. Stopping down to f4 pretty much eliminates it... certainly a *huge* improvement over my Canon L lenses.
Thanks for your anonymous internet opinion, molson. The laws of physics don't change from lens to lens. I think I'll stick with unbiased reviews.
DaveEP wrote:
FYI, my Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS also has some vignetting on my 1Ds2 (FF/FX) so I don't think Nikon are alone in this. The vignetting tends to disappear at I stop down though.
Exactly-- so the fanboys have nothing to get excited about on the vignetting side of things, really. The 70-200L does vignette quite a bit at f/2.8.
Julius, I do agree with your sattement about the C 70-200 F4L lens, I got rid of the 2.8 version when I had the 1DMk2n body due to its extremenly poor performance. Also, I find interesting and refreshing your statement about the great perfromance of the 70-300vr lens with the Nikon FF camera. Wow, did Nikon give us a gift without telling anyone about it? Sounds like I will be in hog heaven when I get the D3 or D700. Moreover, you mention the 70-180 Nikkor, geees, that has been on my all time wish list, I may get that one isntead of a macro lens.
You can see it through the VF without taking a picture...happy testing
Yes and in that surfer shot you do see a little vignetting, but really...did that hurt the picture? If you have a face that completely fills the screen, it might hurt the image, but it seems to me that 95% of the time, this is pixel peeping. Would it be better if it didn't? Sure. But I really don't think it's that big a deal. It would not stop me from buying this lens again.
I used this lens on my N80 long before I went digital. Never noticed an issue. I realize that it seems to be more pronounced on digital sensors, but it just doesn't seem that big of a deal to me. If Nikon replaces this lens in the next year, I suppose we can believe they thought it was an issue. If not, they apparently don't.
jvarszegi wrote:
Thanks for your anonymous internet opinion, molson. The laws of physics don't change from lens to lens. I think I'll stick with unbiased reviews.
Judging by your posts, I'm quite sure the laws of physics are far beyond your comprehension...
C'mon guys, the 70-200mm Nikkor does vignette on FF. It's not a big deal, but to deny it would be succumbing to fanboyism.
I know we've been spoiled by Nikon's recent awesomeness -- to the point where we can't recognized that a telephoto lens wide open *might* have downfalls.
jamach wrote:
Julius, I do agree with your sattement about the C 70-200 F4L lens, I got rid of the 2.8 version when I had the 1DMk2n body due to its extremenly poor performance. Also, I find interesting and refreshing your statement about the great perfromance of the 70-300vr lens with the Nikon FF camera. Wow, did Nikon give us a gift without telling anyone about it? Sounds like I will be in hog heaven when I get the D3 or D700. Moreover, you mention the 70-180 Nikkor, geees, that has been on my all time wish list, I may get that one isntead of a macro lens.
Joe my friend you got that right. Selling my previous Nikkor 70-180mm Micro when I switched to Canon was a heartbreaker for me, I really like that lens which is just as good at long distance as it is for close-up work. It is a screwdrive lens but the focus is lightning fast with these new cameras. And believe me you will be very pleasantly surprised of the performance of the 70-300 ED VR lens on a full field camera. I tried it now on both the D3 and my new D700 and I am just blown away. Just to mention I have pretty good comparison base since I also have the Nikkor 200-400 ED VR.
The 70-300 at f/8-11 stands up against the competition up to 200-250mm and gets just a tiny bit soft at 300, but a little extra sharpening takes care of it.
To continue with my new toy the D700, it is a camera beyond your dreams. Everything I liked in the Canon 5D is in there and everything I missed in the 5D is also in there (including all professional quality body). It is not only a home run for Nikon but it is a blast!
Save your pennies and get it, you won't be sorry!
f/4 didn't fix the vignetting for us. At least, not at 86mm. We haven't done any real testing (just fun shooting) and honestly, I'm not interested in doing any because it doesn't bother me. However, these might help those who do care or need to know:
Both are straight out of the camera, NEF files converted to .jpg in Capture NX 2 and then resized to 800px.
86mm @ f/4
200mm @ f/7.1 is apparently much better
Like I said, definitely not "scientific" testing, but examples from our day of shooting for fun.
