about | support
home
 

Search Used

Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
96 238449 Mar 18, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
91% of reviewers $1,625.72
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.86
8.55
9.6
2139NAS_180

Specifications:
Exclusive Silent Wave Motor enables ultra-high-speed autofocusing with exceptional accuracy and powerful super-quiet operation
VR operation offers the equivalent of using a shutter speed 3 stops faster. In addition, active vibration mode selection is possible. For using in an active situation such as in a car, boat or plane.
VR ON/OFF mode available
New cosmetic design
5 ED elements reduce chromatic aberrations providing superior optica performance - even at maximum aperture
Fully compatible with Nikon TC-14E II and TC-20E II Teleconverters
Internal Focusing (IF) design for smoother focusing and great body balance
M/A mode enable instant switching from autofocus to manual with virtually no lag time even during AF servo operation
No power consumption during manual focus operation
Rounded diaphragm (9 blades) for natural blur
Focuses as close as 4.9ft (AF) 4.6ft (MF)
High-performance Nikon Super Intergrated Coating offers superior color reproduction and minimizes ghost and flare
Detachable tripod mounting collar provided
Filter attachment does not rotate with focusing
New G design enables apertures to be selected from select Nikon AF SLR camera bodies
New G design incorporates distance informatin for flash and ambient light exposure processes
Fully compatible with D1X, D1H, D100, F5, F100, N80, N75 and N65


 


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6  next
          
Peter Choi
Offline
Image Upload: On

Registered: Sep 16, 2006
Location: Japan
Posts: 68
Review Date: Mar 12, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Just check the other reviews, that says it all. Bokeh, Build Quality, Image Quality, VR is amazing!
Cons:
None.

Without a doubt, this is the best lens I have ever used (from both Nikon and my Canon days).

Mar 12, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Peter Choi to your Buddy List  
Philip Shillit
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Nov 25, 2006
Location: N/A
Posts: 3
Review Date: Feb 18, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Without the best lens I have ever used. Sharp is an understatement. The VR works better than I could ever believe. Hand held at full 200mm, f11, I can get sharp photos at 1/20s exposure. Stunning. It is expensive...but worth every last penny! I upgraded from a 80-200 2.8 afs. That too is a great lense, but slightly lacking in overall sharpness....and lacking VR!
Cons:
Still to find one



Feb 18, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Philip Shillit to your Buddy List  
Fatbelly
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 17, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 5
Review Date: Feb 8, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Superb image quality and colour rendition. Built to last.
Cons:
Price, but you only get what you pay for.

I have bought this lens after buying a Sigma 100-300mm f4.
Although the Sigma had more reach at the long end it does not in any way compete with the Nikon for image quality.
That is not to say that the Sigma is not a good lens because it is, its just that the Nikon lens blows the competition right out of the water.

The VR is amazing, I have taken sharp pictures using the VR at shutter speeds of 1/15 of a second and that's hand held with no mono-pod or tripod. The lens feels well built as well, not at all plastic or fragile.

If you are looking at this review then you probably already know something about this lens, if you have the money then you go ahead and buy it you will not in any way be disappointed.

Here are some photos taken at the British Museum in London. All were in low light and hand held. If you have never visited the British Museum then you really really should it is wonderful, jammed full of mind blowing artifacts many of which are thousands of years old.

http://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/433016/an/0/page/1#433016

Here are some sports photos. they were taken on a cold and foggy / misty day.

http://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/433016/an/0/page/1#433016



Feb 8, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Fatbelly to your Buddy List  
Gary Thom
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 1, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Dec 1, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,500.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Build, feel, look, VR
Cons:
Weight

Just bought it yesterday, take a few test shots, was initially disappointed by the mild blur, then realized I had take a pretty good shot at 1.6s / F5.0 / 70mm, so eager to get started I hadn't even changed the camera settings!

This one is a keeper Smile


Dec 1, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Gary Thom to your Buddy List  
Timm
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Oct 4, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 4390
Review Date: Nov 20, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,650.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: It's mine.
Cons:
No A-S mount, zoom ring too tight.

I borrowed one of these beasties a couple of years ago and immediately fell in love. I finally added it to my kit a week ago.

Shooting on a D200, the low-light AF is impressive, the VR really does what it's supposed to, what more can I say? Oh, yeah--that bokeh--yummm.

Works wonderfully with the Canon 500D macro diopter, making for one fast, sharp macro lens. I really enjoy the vesitality of zoom for macro work. I can choose my working distance and BG very easily and quickly, while setting the image size with the focus.

I also have the 17-35 2.8, and having the common 77mm filter is great--one of each filter.

I get a lot of amusement from some of these reviews--too large and heavy? It's a 70-200 f2.8--of course it's huge!

Cons:

How many photogs willing to lay out $1700 US don't use an A-S style QR on their tripod? How much trouble would it be to dovetail the base of the tripod mount? Oh, well, so Kirk Enterprises gets another $70 of my money--their mount is beautifully machined and I reccomend it highly.

The zoom ring is far too stiff for my tastes. Hopefully it'll loosen up a bit with use.

Now I have to find a holster that actually fits this rig for ski season. It does fit in my LowePro TLZ AW, but barely, and that with the hood reversed. I think a colapsable rubber hood might be the thing for ski photography.


Nov 20, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Timm to your Buddy List  
tanglefoot47
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Oct 12, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 14828
Review Date: Sep 20, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,600.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Fast, VR, built like a tank and best of all sharp
Cons:
Price maybe but you get what you pay for

Perhaps the best lens I have ever owned and I have owned many nice lenses when I had Canon gear. I have nothing but praise for this lens.

Sep 20, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add tanglefoot47 to your Buddy List  
dj dunzie
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Aug 14, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 7020
Review Date: Sep 4, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,900.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Very, very fast; VR is fantastic; Sharpness throughout range; Wonderful detail even for fast action; Build quality is phenominal.
Cons:
Much pricier than the 80-200 lens.

OK, it's pricey for a zoom. But if you stop to consider that it's a MUCH newer piece than the old 80-200 design, and adds VR, I guess the price is actually fairly much in line.

With that out of the way, I upgraded from the 80-200 f2.8 D ED, and at first I have to admit I wasn't "blown away". Shooting indoors with mediocre lighting and fast action as a test, I didn't find the images any brighter or more vibrant. However, I soon learned that the lens is far more versatile than the old one, and honestly does allow for many more uses. Once I figured out how to get more out of this lens, my "keeper" rate has actually gone way up. Panning with this lens is fantastic, and the VR really is for REAL. Handheld, this lens far exceeds the 80-200, even with faster shutter speeds. The detail is phenominal, and I doubt you will find a faster AF lens anywhere. I have used the equivalent L series Canon (70-200 2.8 IS) for a brief demo, and despite the salesman's claims, I believe this lens focuses faster, both for single and continuous AF.

I may be in the minority on this, but the only minor gripe I have is that the front focus trim ring rotates (the actual front filter area does not) and having bigger "mitts" I sometimes had to remind myself to keep my left hand away from it. Never was an issue with my 80-200, but that's of course a very minor issue, and one I'm completely adjusted to now.

There are a couple other advantages over the 80-200, in that (1) I can couple it up with a TC-14E2 teleconverter and extend it's range and (2) the new tripod mounting piece is not only extremely TRICK but also removable, which is fantastic for hand-held shooting.

Anyone who has only used kit-type lenses and slower zooms will be blown away in every way by this fantastic lens.


Sep 4, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add dj dunzie to your Buddy List  
PILLMAN
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 2, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 12
Review Date: Sep 2, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,514.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Was waiting and waiting and waiting for the 18-200 -- of course still waiting.... Then deciding between new glass and a new camera. . Feel glass if more important than the camera. Therefore, I chose glass...and I chose the best Im told.. Just received.. hurricane weekend here and can't wait to get outdoors and try it out... Fall around corner...
Cons:
Im sure none. will post later.. (expensive, yet you get what you pay for Im told )

coming...

Sep 2, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add PILLMAN to your Buddy List  
rocklobster
Offline
[ X ]



Registered: Apr 10, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 36
Review Date: Jul 25, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,700.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: This lens put on same BIG TIME THE 80-200. I have no words for this lens i like it a lot this is my new baby.
Cons:
toooooooooo sharp lollll

This is one of the best thing of my life is easy to use is SUPER FAST AND LOOKS SEXY LOLLLLLLL

Get this lens if you have the money and do not listen others or listen storys about the old crappy 80-200.
You may save money with the 80-200 BUT it is not the same quality NOT even near.


OHHHHH god i am in heaven with this lens.


Jul 25, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add rocklobster to your Buddy List  
Remy
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 9, 2005
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 177
Review Date: Jun 6, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,600.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Sharpness, autofocus speed and accuracy, contrast, build quality, lens hood, filter size, VR
Cons:
These are small compared to the pros: weight needs getting used to, the price is a bit high compared to some competition. Minimum focus distance is also a minor quirk (1,5meter in AF, 1,4 in MF mode).

Bought the 70-200 a few weeks ago after debating which lens to get: a Sigma APO 70-300, a Sigma 70-200, a Nikkor 80-200 AF-S..etcetera. I decided to go with 'the best' right away: I've seen more than enough upgrade-paths around me and would not want to do the same. Get it right, right away.

The lens is definitely one of the best Nikkor-zooms: very well built, stellar optics, great AF-S, great VR with horizontal panning detection and active mode, the list goes on.

The few downsides are small (see pros and cons): if you don't have a telezoom yet or are looking to upgrade: definitely look at this one despite its hefty pricetag.


Jun 6, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Remy to your Buddy List  
thebeephaha
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Oct 28, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1814
Review Date: May 28, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,600.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Great build, VR usefulness, sharpness wide open, focusing speed, less weight than the 80-200 AF-S.
Cons:
Its really long in physical size compaired to its older brothers (80-200 AF-D, 80-200 AF-S), VR takes some getting used to.

I have gotten tack sharp shots at 1/20th of a second with this lens when it is in it's "Active" mode. It's absolutely great, sadly I've not had a chance to try shooting any sports with it yet, but I'm sure it won't let me down.

May 28, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add thebeephaha to your Buddy List  
Grognard
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 11, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 2149
Review Date: May 19, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Its sharp, and well made.
Cons:
Heavy, expensive

Just got it today, and I took some photographs with it that are nice and sharp. Focus is blazingly fast. Too bloody expensive though!

May 19, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Grognard to your Buddy List  
hajagee
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Apr 13, 2005
Location: Singapore
Posts: 23
Review Date: May 5, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,600.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Bokeh! Tack sharp.
Cons:
Weight. A drain on camera battery

Have been using this for a year. Was a newbie when I started and this lens thought me the meaning of bokeh. It's still my favourite lens. Made me invest in a more comfortable neckstrap, too.

May 5, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add hajagee to your Buddy List  
faizal
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jun 22, 2004
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 22
Review Date: Feb 14, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Ergonomics, sharp, bokeh is awesome!!, VR, built quality
Cons:
expensive? you get what you paid for,

Bought this lens after using Sigma 70-200/2.8 for a few months. The Sigma was a good lens but there was something missing.

Finally bought the Nikon. The bokeh is beautiful. Even with 1.4x KENKO teleconverter, the images are still very much usable.

Used the lens to shoot motorsports, weddings, stage concerts/theater and other. VR really works like a charm for low light shooting.

Check out here! http://www.pbase.com/afaizal

Highly recommended!


Feb 14, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add faizal to your Buddy List  
paparazzinick
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 8, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 7393
Review Date: Feb 3, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,300.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: sharp, f2.8.... I could go on and on
Cons:
none

I never owned a lens like this before. I had some kick butt Canon lenses when I was a Canon guy, but nothing like this. Now I know why everyone at Canon wanted a 70-200 f2.8 IS, well I always used a 70-200 f2.8 and now I got my VR. Man, I did not know what I was missing until now. I just shot a wedding and was able to handhold a shot all the ways down to 1/30 at 200mm and a 1.4x tele on it.

Man is this lens awesome.


Feb 3, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add paparazzinick to your Buddy List  
pik2004
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 30, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Dec 30, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,600.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: It's an excellent and very sharp. VR works very well. ultra fast focusing.
Cons:
I want to carry this lens with everywhere, butit's bit too large (as any other 2.8 lens). no aperature ring.

I owned this lens for about 5 months now and I love the way it works; smooth, sharp, and fast. without a doubt it's my favorite and best lens (ofcourse price has something to with it too).

Dec 30, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add pik2004 to your Buddy List  

   



Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
96 238449 Mar 18, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
91% of reviewers $1,625.72
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.86
8.55
9.6
2139NAS_180


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6  next