Tristanstudios wrote: I would love to be able to use the 200 as a 400 f/4 if the need arises. Good combination? Better than the 200-500 5.6 ?
The TC 20E III is phenomenal on the Chub, better than the 200-400 @ f4.
Faster focusing AND sharper at distances over 60 yds. I sold my 200-400
within days of first using the Chub/TC 2x combo at BdA (~9 yrs ago)
Thanks folks. Sounds like all 3 do a good to very good job on the 200.
It will be going on my D810.
Did they ever make a version 3 of the 1.7x or stop at version 2?
Question for this thread... I sold my VRII about 2 years ago. I'm debating picking up a mint VR1. I've been told the optics, other than coatings are identical... is this the case (as far as you all know)? Also, I'm aware the VR is the first gen, but I normally shot outside in good light for portraits...
Blakehfreeman wrote:
Question for this thread... I sold my VRII about 2 years ago. I'm debating picking up a mint VR1. I've been told the optics, other than coatings are identical... is this the case (as far as you all know)? Also, I'm aware the VR is the first gen, but I normally shot outside in good light for portraits...
That is my understanding as well, and the reason that I own the VR I instead of the II.
BSPhotog wrote:
That is my understanding as well, and the reason that I own the VR I instead of the II.
Ditto. So far as I know the nanocoat is the only optical difference. FWIW, I’ve owned both versions and noticed zero difference in the images they produce. Both are awesome+.
I need the help of someone with experience in the difference between version 1 and 2 of this lens. I know that the Nanocoated is basically the difference, knowing that my work is 95% backlight, they believe that the change from vri to vr ii is justified. Does anyone have photos of the vr ii, how does it handle backlighting? thanks in advance, have a wonderful week
My VRII handled backlighting fairly well... I would pay the extra $5/600 for the VRII if you shoot a lot of backlit images, as I believe that was the biggest improvement from VRI to VRII.
zequi wrote:
Hi guys, how are you all doing?
I need the help of someone with experience in the difference between version 1 and 2 of this lens. I know that the Nanocoated is basically the difference, knowing that my work is 95% backlight, they believe that the change from vri to vr ii is justified. Does anyone have photos of the vr ii, how does it handle backlighting? thanks in advance, have a wonderful week
