 |
|
|
Russtopher
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 31, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 26
|
|
Review Date: Feb 4, 2021
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
VERY high quality image results. Half the weight of the f/2.8 version, and every bit as sharp. Very fast & accurate auto-focusing.
|
|
Cons:
|
Expensive tripod collar. But not needed.
|
|
|
|
|
 Feb 4, 2021
|
|
milkod2001
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 16, 2011
Location: Slovakia
Posts: 1147
|
|
Review Date: May 20, 2018
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, good rendering, very versatile lens, fast AF
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
You cannot go wrong with this lens. Unless you really need 2.8 version for portraits, this f4 version is way to go. It is light, has fast AF and gives great results. This is the only lens i use for studio product photography (large furniture pieces). This lens never misses.
|
|
|
May 20, 2018
|
|
loganme
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 30, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 352
|
|
Review Date: Aug 28, 2017
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $825.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Weight, VR System, Image Quality
|
|
Cons:
|
Build quality could be 'beefier' for a lack of a better word. The build is fine, but nowhere near the level of the new 70-200 f2.8
|
|
|
I got this lens to use in the studio for portrait sessions. Without any AF fine tuning on my D810, this thing was dead on. Focus is quick and silent and REALLY accurate, which is really important to me.
It's incredibly easy to handhold and can yield you sharp results even at around 1/15 a second if your subject is static. It's very impressive stuff from Nikon.
For my needs, this is the perfect tool to compliment my non-AF Zeiss lenses. And aside from the less robust build of the lens vs. the f2.8 version, it's built to Nikon's professional standard.
Highly recommend this lens.
|
|
|
Aug 28, 2017
|
|
Rooster L200
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 1, 2009
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 256
|
|
Review Date: Dec 19, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $850.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Light, excellent optics, vr working great. Balances great on d600, even without grip. Glad i bought it in stead of the far heavier 2.8. Recommended.
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
Another great lens, one can see the progress Nikon made with this excellent lens.
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2014
|
|
oldshutterhand
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 24, 2012
Location: Hungary
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 29, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Tack sharp wide open at both ends of the range, excellent vr, light and small
|
|
Cons:
|
price is very high, feels not toughly build
|
|
Not to much to think of this lens, because it is optically and mechanically excellent, except for the price which is very high. This lens is excellent optically but feels not so rock solidly built like Canons. For this price I want bulletproof lens perhaps, but on the other hand it is small and light which is preferable.
See in more detail at:
http://oldshutterhand.com/equipment-reviews/nikkor-70-200-f4-review/
|
|
|
May 29, 2014
|
|
dimsonation
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 30, 2010
Location: Israel
Posts: 7
|
|
Review Date: Dec 13, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
sharpness, zoom range, VR, size, weight
|
|
Cons:
|
build quality not as good as canon counterpart
|
|
|
after shooting canon for 8 years, i moved over to the other side. this lens was 2nd on my shopping list after the 14-24.
after shooting with both the 70-200 f/4L IS and the 70-200 f/2.8L ISII and getting used to the L build quality i was somewhat disappointed with the nikon counterpart.
the body feels plasticky, the focus and zoom rings are not as smooth as i was used to... don't get me wrong, it's good, but doesn't give you that "bulletproof" feeling when you handle it.
optically it's great. sharpness is on par with canon which is almost legendary, and the stabilizer is even better, at least by a full stop compared to the canon i owned
size and weight is about the same as canon, which is great if you like to go light. some people complain about the lack of collar ring, well, it balances just fine on my D800, while on a tripod
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2013
|
|
eduardvdk
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 9, 2013
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 30, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,200.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
incredible zoom
|
|
Cons:
|
Weight
|
|
This is an amazing lens, I have been comparing this to the 70-200 2.8 for a long time now. Since the zoom on this lens is so much better, I love to use it during my work, it gives the images so much depth, see some examples here: http://www.bruidsfotograaf.nl
I recommend to try them both before investing, either way, it will make you very happy!
Eduard
|
|
|
Sep 30, 2013
|
|
Ripolini
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 5, 2005
Location: Italy
Posts: 1654
|
|
Review Date: Apr 21, 2013
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
see previous post
|
|
Cons:
|
see previous post
|
|
|
UPDATE:
I've tested it against the 105 VR Micro-Nikkor.
The focusing distance was 2 m. As usual, the lens was on tripod (Gitzo with Foba ball head), I used live-view to focus accurately, and MLU.
At f/4 the 105 VR was slightly better (just); @ f/5.6 differences were very subtle. At f/8 I couldn't detect any meaningful difference. Both lenses showed even sharpness across the frame (on D700).
|
|
|
Apr 21, 2013
|
|
Ripolini
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 5, 2005
Location: Italy
Posts: 1654
|
|
Review Date: Apr 21, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Sufficiently lightweight, good image quality
|
|
Cons:
|
No tripod collar in the box, distortion, flare (well, I know it's a zoom with many elements and nano-coating can't do miracles).
|
|
|
I have read many reviews of this lens before buying it. However as I tested it, I was a little bit disappointed by its quality. Probably I was expecting too much ... IQ was 'good' but it didn't shine on my D700 (my reference for IQ is my 100/2 Zeiss). Somebody wrote in a forum that it outperforms the AF ED 180/2.8D. I'm not sure it's true ... (I can't verify because I sold my 180 to fund this zoom).
I tested it against my AF ED 200/4 Micro though; focusing distance was 3 m (i.e. 15 times the FL) and the 200 Micro won hands down: lower distortion, lower vignetting and, most important, higher sharpness with 'cleaner' details.
I've not tested it vs my 105 VR Micro yet. As I'll do, I'll let you know.
I tried it with the TC-14 E II and IQ w/open was good; a usable combo when you need more reach, definitely. VR works fine; with the 1.4X I could take sharp pictures at 1/40 s. Very useful feature.
In conclusion, a good zoom but not at the same level as a prime (at the long end). A little bit overpriced if you consider IQ. AF-S and VR are useful features, and Nikon charges you for them.
|
|
|
Apr 21, 2013
|
|
fletcher8969
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 7, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 13
|
|
Review Date: Mar 15, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,300.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Great size, excellent IQ, VR is amazing. Stunning sharpness from f4. Reasonable price for level of quality.
|
|
Cons:
|
Nothing I've noticed yet.
|
|
|
Shooting on a D800 this is as sharp (or a smig sharper) than my Nikon 24-70 f2.8 @ f4. The VR makes the difference here I believe. On a tripod I'd say they are pretty equal at equal focal lengths and apertures. This is as sharp as my copy of the 105 f2 DC at f4 and I like the color a little better on this one.
I love this lens!
|
|
|
Mar 15, 2013
|
|
c4change
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Jul 23, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 889
|
|
Review Date: Mar 9, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
fast, quiet focusing, close focusing of 0.9m, IQ. LIGHT for travel/entended use
|
|
Cons:
|
tripod collar not included at the price
|
|
|
This lens is excellent even wide open. Focusing is fast and quiet. IQ is a given. It is built very substantial without the weight of its 2.8 cousin. So, unless you need that extra stop...
|
|
|
Mar 9, 2013
|
|
R10
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 4, 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 79
|
|
Review Date: Jan 12, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
razor sharp throughout the frame, perfect size, very effective and silent VR, smooth zoom ring, min focus distance (and max. reprod. ratio)
|
|
Cons:
|
Bokeh in transition zone better than with the 2,8-VR II version, esp. around the short end (70mm), but still nervous and not quite as pleasing as with Canon's EF 4/70-200L IS; expensive tripod collar
|
|
|
Intro: I've used quite a few "70-200" lenses in the past 25 years. On DSLRs I used, e.g., the Leica-R 4/80-200 (5DI&II), Zeiss Contax N Vario-Sonnar 3,5-4,5/70-210 (5DII), Canon EF 4/70-200L IS (5DII), Nikon 2,8/70-200 VR II (D800). end intro
I use this f4-Nikkor on the D800 and prefer it over all the others named above.
It's as sharp as the Leica throughout the frame, with similar micro contrast, but with AF/VR/auto aperture -> more keeper...
Towards the edge/corners it is even sharper than the 2,8 VR II Nikkor (at f4) and has a more pleasing bokeh in the transition zone (like the Leica), yet not as pleasing as the EF 4/70-200L IS, esp. near the short end. It is sharper than the EF though. It features much less focus breathing than the 2,8 VR II.
I prefer the f4 over the f2.8 for versatility (weight) reasons. I perfectly know the benefits of fast lenses but this range of focal length I also use a lot when hiking/travelling. So, for me, this lens was a long awaited and welcome Nikkor.
It pairs perfectly with the TC14E II converter.
Price tag is ok but the tripod collar is a bit overpriced but, well, way better than the cheaper alternatives I've tried...
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
12
|
34424
|
Feb 4, 2021
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
92% of reviewers
|
$915.00
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
8.36
|
8.60
|
9.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
;)
