I am in the market for a Nikkor Z 70-200/2.8
Interested in the mark ii for its lower weight and af speed as I will use the lens for fast dog photography.
However , I read some info that the sharpness is inferior on the mark II compared to the mark i.
What is the consensus now on this lens?Anyone have used both? Should I be worried?
Orsonneke wrote:
I am in the market for a Nikkor Z 70-200/2.8
Interested in the mark ii for its lower weight and af speed as I will use the lens for fast dog photography.
However , I read some info that the sharpness is inferior on the mark II compared to the mark i.
What is the consensus now on this lens?Anyone have used both? Should I be worried?
You want the lower weight and better AF speed of the V2...
Yet somehow YouTube has convinced you to be concerned about some random sharpness difference between the two?
The 70-200mm f/2.8 V2 is a world-class lens used by professional photographers in just about every field, along with plenty of very well-funded amateurs.
I can almost guarantee that whatever tiny difference in sharpness "MAY" exist will never be noticed by you, recognized by anyone looking at your photos, or have any meaningful impact on the images you make.
Take the lighter weight and faster AF and go shoot.
Orsonneke wrote:
I am in the market for a Nikkor Z 70-200/2.8
Interested in the mark ii for its lower weight and af speed as I will use the lens for fast dog photography.
However , I read some info that the sharpness is inferior on the mark II compared to the mark i.
What is the consensus now on this lens?Anyone have used both? Should I be worried?
i have both, and, no, the Mark I is not sharper than the Mark II even in controlled environments to eliminate variables (I've done this first-hand). Side by side on Lightroom it's hard to distinguish one over the other.
