jberry wrote:
Canon has so much offers for the 70-200, F4, F4 IS, F2.8, F2.8 IS, They even still sell thej mark1 at B&H with the mark 2 IS so you have two choices.
Nikon is so exclusive, 70-200 VR1. Thats it, then they make a new one, 70-200VR2.
Its like we made the best you HAVE to buy the best, no other offers. Well maybe thats good cuz my canon buddys get surprised with I tell them I got a 70-200, I dont need to tell them what kind lol.
simply incorrect, the 70/80-200 may be nikons most updated lens ever in fact, counting from Ai lenses only (f-mount) i count 9 different professional grade lenses-- 5 later of which are very readily available
Ai 80-200/4.5
Ai-S 80-200/4
Ai 80-200/2.8 ED
Ai-S 80-200/2.8 ED
AF 80-200/2.8 ED (push pull)
AF 80-200/2.8 D ED (two ring)
AF-S 80-200/2.8 D IF-ED
AF-S 70-200/2.8 G IF-ED VR
AF-S 70-200/2.8 G IF-ED VR II
also notable but not considered pro grade is the nikkor-
AF 70-210 4.0, i enjoyed my copy, esp for the price.
---XR--- wrote:
simply incorrect, the 70/80-200 may be nikons most updated lens ever in fact, counting from Ai lenses only (f-mount) i count 9 different professional grade lenses-- 5 later of which are very readily available
Ai 80-200/4.5
Ai-S 80-200/4
Ai 80-200/2.8 ED
Ai-S 80-200/2.8 ED
AF 80-200/2.8 ED (push pull)
AF 80-200/2.8 D ED (two ring)
AF-S 80-200/2.8 D IF-ED
AF-S 70-200/2.8 G IF-ED VR
AF-S 70-200/2.8 G IF-ED VR II
also notable but not considered pro grade is the nikkor-
AF 70-210 4.0, i enjoyed my copy, esp for the price.
But the point is that Canon has a CURRENT 70-200 to fit almost everyone's budget.
Current Amazon prices for the Canon glass:
70-200 f/4L for $635
70-200 f/4L IS for $1100
70-200 f/2.8 L for $1200
70-200 f/2.8 L IS for $1600
70-200 f/2.8 L IS II for $2070
All of these lenses are very sharp and have extremely fast ultrasonic focusing motors. Compare this with Nikon, which has only 2 70/80-200mm lenses available now (since the VR1 has been discontinued and cannot be bought new anymore)
80-200 f/2.8 D for $1100
70-200 f/2.8 VR II for $2170
So, whereas Canon lets you choose based on your budget and weight/size requirements, with Nikon you don't really have much of a choice. Also, the 80-200 AF-D lacks an ultrasonic motor, so AF is slower and you lose FTM compared to the Canon lenses. Not to mention the fact that the 70-200 VR II performs worse than the Canon IS II model, but costs $100 more?
edeag3 wrote:
But the point is that Canon has a CURRENT 70-200 to fit almost everyone's budget.
Current Amazon prices for the Canon glass:
70-200 f/4L for $635
70-200 f/4L IS for $1100
70-200 f/2.8 L for $1200
70-200 f/2.8 L IS for $1600
70-200 f/2.8 L IS II for $2070
All of these lenses are very sharp and have extremely fast ultrasonic focusing motors. Compare this with Nikon, which has only 2 70/80-200mm lenses available now (since the VR1 has been discontinued and cannot be bought new anymore)
80-200 f/2.8 D for $1100
70-200 f/2.8 VR II for $2170
So, whereas Canon lets you choose based on your budget and weight/size requirements, with Nikon you don't really have much of a choice. Also, the 80-200 AF-D lacks an ultrasonic motor, so AF is slower and you lose FTM compared to the Canon lenses. Not to mention the fact that the 70-200 VR II performs worse than the Canon IS II model, but costs $100 more?...Show more →
Yes because as well all know, if a lens hasn't been made in the last couple of years and doesn't have USM, and all the latest and great advancements and trinkets it's absolutely useless.
We also know that because a lens is discontinued it's impossible to find them and if it isn't found new, you may as well not buy one anyway- aswell as being useless.
i don't play the who is better game, so i won't bother sarcastically answering the Canon 70-200 V.S Nikon 70-200 bit, but i will note that canon has for a very long time had the upper hand in the sports section of DSLR gear marketing, so that is a big reason as to why they have a large number of updated 70-200mm lenses available. I personally do not care as the 70-200 focal length is useless to myself, but i have owned 5 different nikon lenses in that FL in the past, and they were all fantastic. If you like the fact Canon has so many 70-200's, shoot canon. nikon shooters have always gotten by on what nikon produced.
and as to put another damper on your updated 70-200 rant- the Fossil of a lens the AF-S 80-200 2.8 has been known to be a sharper lens than the lens that nikon updated it with - the 70-200mm VR.
Re. D3s: No hand strap attachment point on the body
Capture NX2 not free with pro D bodies
Capture NX2 runs glacially slowly, even on a top spec machine; for this reason, even if free, I would not use it. I get excellent results with Aperture and Capture One.
+1 KittyK: "AF points too centered on FX bodies". That really has been a problem with some work, for sure.
+1 Rodolfo: "The menu banks should allow the option to revert to saved settings when the camera is turned off". This is a kind of insanity, to me. This could be fixed via a firmware update, too, I am sure. Actually, my main complaint is that the bank settings are NOT saved—or has this been fixed and I didn't see it?
+1 Still Bill, re. no UWA PC-E lenses (and not being able to manually configure the T and S axes is a definite minus.
Apart from that, a happy Nikon camper, here. I moved over from Canon FF bodies and Zeiss–Leica glass when the D3 and 14–24/2.8 was announced, and have no regrets. D3s image quality, while only 12Mp, is fabulous.
No custom setting banks that save all shooting parameters in one location and is easily accessible from the main mode dial (except for the D7k)
Lack of in-body IS/VR
Auto-ISO has a fixed min shutter speed setting. Does not vary with focal length nor does it allow you to set a factor based on focal length and/or presence of VR, making feature less useful with zoom lenses
No new f/2 or f/2.8 primes; only 2 f/4 zooms. Not everyone wants to lug around big f/1.4 primes or f/2.8 zooms. How about some compact, lightweight high quality semi-pro primes and zooms between the f/5.6 consumer zooms and the professional line?
I shoot nikon and like them the best but I could write up two pages of nits. D7000 may have addressed some of these not sure.
Colors from the camera. Skin tones are a bitch to get right. It doesn't matter what condition I shoot, what software I use or how long I play with sliders, I can't get them ' right'. This is going to force me to buy an x-rite. I love olympus colors best, followed by sony. As a matter of fact I pretty much think nikon has the worst colors OOC of them all. Not that they're horrible but others are more pleasing.
Live view mirror flop. Thanks for nothing.
Self timer and MLU. Pentax and sony do it. Olympus has the ridiculously flexible antishock mode. Nikon flips you the bird.
No fun features. No shot combines for less noisy super high iso shots. No sweep pano. No in camera hdr.
No ibis.
Quite frankly I would still be a very happy E-5 owner if but for two issues. Raising shadows is poop for 43 cameras and nikon kills olympus in AF-C and low light focusing.
