According provided by lens Nikon N AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm 1: 4G ED SWM VR IF Nano Crystal Coat huge thanks to the store www.fotika.com.uawhere you can find a huge number of different used photographic equipment, including given lens.
Nikon 70-200mm 1: 4G VR AF-S ED IF N
Navigation
- History
- Main Specifications
- Enlightenment 'N' (Nano Crystal Coat)
- Assembly
- Aperture Features
- Stabilizer
- Focus
- 'A / M-M' switch
- Compatibility and Features
- Image quality
- Sample Photos
- My personal experience with the lens
- Prices
- Similar Original Nikkor Lenses
- Results
- User Comments
- Add your review or question on the lens
History
In September 1986, Nikon introduced a very nice lens - Nikon AF Nikkor 70-210mm 1: 4, and, less than a year later, in April 1987, it was discontinued. After which the company had 25 year (!) Break in the release of such lenses. And now, in the fall of 2012, a miracle happened again, a very interesting and functional Nikon N AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm 1: 4G ED SWM VR IF Nano Crystal Coat (from this review) was presented.
Most likely, the appearance of this lens is due to the presence of similar lenses from its direct competitor - Canon. Like Nikon, Canon has been producing since May 1987 Canon Zoom Lens EF 70-210mm 1: 4... But unlike Nikon, in September 1999 Canon is published Canon Zoom Lens EF 70-200mm 1: 4 L USM Ultrasonic, which is supplemented in 2006 Canon Zoom Lens EF 70-200mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic, and in 2018 Canon Zoom Lens EF 70-200mm 1: 4 L IS II USM.
Nikon N AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm 1: 4G ED SWM VR IF Nano Crystal Coat (abbreviated as Nikon 70-200 / 4G) is part of Nikon Nikkor's line of professional zoom lenses with a maximum aperture of f / 4.
I include only 3 lenses to them:
- Nikon N AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm 1: 4G ED VR SWM IF Aspherical Nano Crystal Coat
- Nikon ED AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm 1: 4G VR N Nano Crystal Coat SWM IF Aspherical
- Nikon N AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm 1: 4G ED SWM VR IF Nano Crystal Coat (from this review)
Optionally, in addition to this line you can put
- sprinkled Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 12-24mm 1: 4G ED SWM IF Aspherical
- super monster of a completely different weight category Nikon AF-S Nikkor 200-400mm 1: 4G VR ED
- and updating the super monster in the face Nikon AF-S Nikkor 200-400mm 1: 4GII ED VR N Nano Crystal Coat
Nikon 70-200 / 4G stands apart dark televisions class 70-300 and aside from light televisions of class 70 (80) -200 / 2.8. Yes, and old Nikon AF Nikkor 70-210mm 1: 4 has nothing to do with the hero of this review. Still, I tend to classify the Nikon 70-200 / 4G as a 'dark' line.
Nikon 70-200mm 1: 4G VR AF-S ED IF N
Main technical characteristics of Nikon N AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm 1: 4G ED SWM VR IF Nano Crystal Coat:
| Review Instance Name | Nikon N AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm 1: 4G ED SWM VR IF Nano Crystal Coat 82018417 |
| Basic properties |
|
| Front Filter Diameter | 67 mm, plastic thread for filters |
| Focal length | 70-200 mm EGF for Nikon DX cameras is 105-300 mm |
| Zoom ratio | 2.86 X (usually just talking about XNUMXx zoom) |
| Designed by | for digital cameras Nikon FX |
| Number of aperture blades | 9 rounded petals |
| Tags | a window with a focusing distance in meters and feet, focal lengths for 70, 85, 105, 135, 200 mm, a bayonet mount mark, an installation and fixation mark for the hood (an additional tripod foot has a mark for horizontal / vertical orientation) |
| Diaphragm | from f / 4 over the entire range of focal lengths to f / 32. The lens does not have an aperture ring (G - lens type) |
| MDF (minimum focusing distance) | 1 m, maximum magnification ratio 1: 3.7 |
| The weight | 850 g |
| Optical design | 20 elements in 14 groups. The scheme includes:
The image of the optical circuit is clickable. |
| Lens hood | Nikon HB-60 (supplied) |
| Transportation | Using the soft cover CL ‑ 1225 (supplied) |
| Manufacturer country | Made in thailand |
| Period | From October 24, 2012 to the present day (at least until the summer of 2015) |
| Instruction (multilingual) | Download, mirror 2. |
| Price |
Of course, it’s a pity that even compared to the ancient Nikon AF Nikkor 70-210mm 1: 4 new Nikon 70-200 / 4G lost 10mm focal length.
The Nikon 70-200 / 4G 'is equipped' with a very tempting special feature - a gold ring near the front lens, which means it can be classified as a professional lens in the NIKON NIKKOR line. In addition, he is on the list of professional equipment Nikon NPS... True, whether or not Nikon 70-200 / 4G is considered a professional lens is a purely personal matter.
Switch Kit Nikon 70-200mm 1: 4G VR AF-S ED IF N
Enlightenment 'N' (Nano Crystal Coat)
The Nikon 70-200 / 4G boasts an 'N' on its body. 'N' stands for 'Nano Crystal Coat' - nanocrystalline optical coating. Such enlightenment allows you to cope well with glare and flare, and also creates excellent color reproduction. Most likely, only one of the lenses of this objective has' N'-coating. The rest of the lenses have a classic SIC enlightenment (Nikon Super Integrated Coating is a special super integral coating).
It is unfortunate that Nikon does not indicate the number of lenses in the optical circuit that have such enlightenment. I, like some other users, believe that the letter 'N' is put more for marketing. In addition, in real conditions, the lens catches a fairly large number of glare and receives a white veil-flare, even when using a lens hood.
Nikon 70-200mm 1: 4G VR AF-S ED IF N
Assembly
Nikon 70-200 / 4G is manufactured in Thailand, which is not a good indicator for a 'professional' lens. It is pleasant and weighty to the touch, weighing almost 900 grams. Unfortunately Nikon 70-200 / 4G uses non-professional 67mm filters.
When working with the lens, you get a good impression that you really use a decent thing. Tactilely, the Nikon 70-200 / 4G loses slightly to the lenses of the 70 (80) -200 / 2.8 series (their full list here).
On the mount side, the lens has a special rubber skirt that protects the lens from dust and moisture. On official sources, there is no exact confirmation that the Nikon 70-200 / 4G is a dust- and waterproof lens. At the same time, I am inclined to believe that because of this rubber seal, the lens still has a basic dust and moisture protection. In more detail, the security issue of Nikon Nikkor lenses I have described here.
The focusing and zoom rings are rubberized, large and comfortable. Nikon 70-200 / 4G has metal bayonet mount.
It is nice that the inside of the frame of the case, from the bayonet side, is covered special dust collecting velor or flock. While changing the focal length, the rear lens remains motionless, this lens is not afraid of the effect of a 'vacuum cleaner'.
There is a bayonet mount mark and a mark on the case for quick installation of the hood. The lens uses a plastic hood HB-60, which is fixed in special grooves located near the front lens of the lens. The hood can be installed in the opposite direction for transportation. In this position, access to the focus ring is lost.
The Nikon 70-200 / 4G comes with a CL-1225 soft case, and the lens itself is shipped in a small cardboard box with a typical Nikon color scheme.
Important: on its body, the lens has a special place for installing a tripod foot. Sorry foot Nikon RT-1 not included and must be purchased separately. This upset me quite a lot, since the 'professional' lens did not include such a useful thing in the package at once. A new foot costs about 200 USD, which is not very pleasing. The same foot also fits the new Nikon N AF-S Nikkor 300mm 1: 4E PF ED VR, which was also cheated from birth.
Nikon 70-200mm 1: 4G VR AF-S ED IF N
Diaphragm
Diaphragm lens consists of 9 rounded petalswhich form a fairly even hole. It's nice that Nikon did not stint on nine petals. Diaphragm closes to F / 32 over the entire range of focal lengths.
Maximum f / 4 aperture is available over the entire range of focal lengths. F / 4 is exactly 1 stop (2 times) less than F / 2.8. The difference between F / 4 and F / 5.6 is also exactly 1 stop (2 times).
One of the implicit advantages of 1: 4 maximum aperture telephoto lenses is that they can be used with teleconverters without too much trouble. So, Nikon 70-200 / 4G is compatible with teleconverters TC-14E, TC-17E, TC-20E (possibly others). When used with a 1.4x teleconverter, the lens converts to '98-280 / 5.6 ', allowing automatic focusing on all Nikon DSLR cameras. Even when using a 2X teleconverter Nikon 70-200 / 4G turns into '140-400 / 8' and can focus on some cameras. This set can be used by cameras whose focus sensors are designed to work with a maximum aperture of F / 8, they can be found here. At the same time, when using teleconverters with darker telephoto lenses, with auto focus, everything is much worse.
Nikon 70-200mm 1: 4G VR AF-S ED IF N
Stabilizer
The Nikon 70-200 / 4G has a VR (Vibration Reduction) stabilizer, which, according to the instructions, can compensate 5 stops (!) by shutter speed... In numerical terms, this means that you can shoot at shutter speeds 32 times slower than required by a lens without a stabilizer. This lens uses one of the most powerful stabilizers available in Nikon Nikkor lenses (possibly even the most powerful). The stabilization system of Nikon 70-200 / 4G refers to third generation. For example, Nikon N AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm 1: 2.8GII ED VR uses a second generation stabilization system and compensates for only 4 stops excerpts.
The instructions for the Nikon 70-200 / 4G lens indicate 5 stops (measurements by Nikon), and on the official website 4 stops (measurements by CIPA). In any case, the stabilizer works very well.
To enable / disable the stabilizer on the lens there 'VR ON / OFF' switch... There is a 'Normal / Active' switch to select the mode. The gimbal can operate in two modes: 'Normal' and 'Active'.
- 'Normal' mode designed for most scenes and avoids movement when camera shake. Theoretically, the 'Normal' mode can still track the movement of the camera to create panoramas.
- Active Mode most suitable for shooting when the camera can not only shake, but also move in different directions. Most often, it is advised to use this mode when shooting in motion.
I was able to take pictures of stationary objects without blur and strong efforts at 200 mm focal length and 1/10 of a second. And if you try hard, you can get a sharp shot even on shutter speed 1/5 s and 200 mm of focal length. The stabilizer in this lens is felt like no other that I had to shoot.
Nikon 70-200mm 1: 4G VR AF-S ED IF N with covers
Focusing
Nikon 70-200 / 4G focuses quite quietly thanks to 'SWM'-motor (Silent Wbird Motor - quiet wave motor) and refers to the lens'AF S'type (with built-in motor focusing), and therefore it will automatically focus on any Nikon digital SLR camera.
The minimum focusing distance is only 1 meter, while you can shoot Macro with 1: 3.7 magnification... Nikon 70-200 / 4G has a window with distance scale in meters and feet. There is no depth of field scale, as well as marks for working in the infrared spectrum.
The window with the focusing distance is very small, it seems that Nikon was trying to save on transparent plastic for this window.
The Nikon 70-200 / 4G has an optional 'Full ∞-3m' switch that acts as a focusing distance limiter. The ∞ sign means infinity.
- In the 'Full' position, automatic focusing is available over the entire distance range - from ∞ to 1 meter.
- In the '∞-3m' position, auto focus is available in the range from 3 meters to ∞.
Note that during manual focus, the limiter does not work.
Auto Focus Speed - mixed. Depending on the position of the focus limiter and depending on the set focal length, the lens has different autofocus speeds. Attention: the lens focuses at 70 mm of focal length much faster than at 200 mm of focal length. If to make a result, then:
- At '∞-3m' at any focal length, autofocus speed very high, and the lens travel time from infinity to MDF and back is very short.
- At 'Full' and 70mm focal length, focusing speed high enough (closer to average), and the lens run time from infinity to MDF and vice versa is already noticeably increasing.
- 'Full' and 200mm focal length focus speed average, and the running time of the lenses from infinity to MDF and back already allows you to feel some discomfort.
Unfortunately, I have to admit that in general the Nikon 70-200 / 4G focusing speed is several times slower than that of his older brother Nikon N AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm 1: 2.8GII ED VR. At the same time, I'm more than sure that no amateur will feel the lack of focus speed with the Nikon 70-200 / 4G. On cameras Nikon D700 and and Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro the lens focuses tenaciously (does not lose objects from the zone of sharpness). I was very pleased with the quality of the focus system.
During focusing, the front and rear lenses remain stationary, as the lens uses internal focusthat is indicated on the case by the letters'IF'-'Iinternal Focus' - 'Internal Focus'. The front and rear lenses remain stationary while zooming - the lens has internal zoom. Thus, during focusing and changing the focal length, only the internal parts of the lens move. You can easily use any filters, for example polarizing or gradient.
Nikon 70-200 / 4G suffers greatly from the 'Focus Breathing' effect - changing the angle of view while focusing.
Nikon 70-200mm 1: 4G VR AF-S ED IF N
'A / M-M' switch
The lens has a fairly rare 'A / M-M' switch. Usually, these lenses have a more common switch 'M / AM'. Nikon loves to confuse users with various obscure autofocus modes.
If you look, in the 'A / M' position, automatic focusing works with the constant possibility of manual adjustment / focus adjustment, but with the priority of auto focus. It means that 'A / M' mode avoids canceling the autofocus mode due to accidental rotation of the focus ring.
To cancel it during auto focus and switch to the manual focus method, you need to turn the focus ring some distance. The length of this distance is known only in practice.
For comparison, the 'M / A'disables auto focus as soon as the focus ring starts rotating, and' A / M 'mode disables auto focus only after rotating the focus ring for a while.
Nikon has made a distinction between 'A / M' and 'M / A'very fine. If we can summarize the difference between these modes as much as possible, it all comes down to how sensitive the focus ring is to disabling autofocus and switching to manual focus mode. I recommend leaving the 'A / M' mode on and forgetting about this switch forever. For the most complete list of 'A / M' lenses that I have compiled, see here. You can see the various types of switches that use autofocus lenses. here.
The focus ring rotates 135 degrees. When extreme positions are reached, the focus ring does not rest, but continues to slide, without affecting the focus.
Nikon 70-200mm 1: 4G VR AF-S ED IF N with hood HB-60 in transport mode
Compatibility and Features
The lens will work correctly at all Nikon digital SLR cameras.
When using the built-in flash, especially with the lens hood installed, photos may have a black shadow.
EGF lens for Nikon DX cameras is 105-300mm. There is no complete analogue of Nikon 70-200 / 4G for Nikon DX cameras. The most similar lens from the Nikon DX series is Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 55-300mm 1: 4.5-5.6G ED VR SWM HRI. This Nikon 70-200 / 4G works wonderfully on cropped cameras and does not cause any particular inconvenience due to recalculation EGF. In the case of telephoto lenses crop factor Nikon DX cameras in most cases only benefit.
A list of all Nikon DX series lenses can be found. here. For a list of all professional Nikon DX series lenses, see here. The optical design of all Nikon DX lenses can be viewed here.
Nikon 70-200mm 1: 4G VR AF-S ED IF N with hood HB-60
Image quality
Nikon 70-200 / 4G creates a very high-quality picture. Everything is good or very good.
At F / 4, the lens is very sharp in the center over the entire range of focal lengths, and insanely sharp at concealed apertures. Sagging sharpness at extreme values of the focal length is not traced. Professionals will be able to notice a slight drop in sharpness at the corners and edges, but still the sharpness remains at a good level. By the way, for my 12 MP Nikon D700 the lens is too good. Most likely, the Nikon 70-200 / 4G was developed taking into account new cameras with a large number of megapixels and should work fine on Nikon D800,D800E, D810, D810a and others. Even on my Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro, which has problems with sharpness due to a special matrix, the lens creates such sharpness that I could not achieve with fixed lenses.
Chromatic aberrations well corrected, during the entire shooting I almost never could notice them. Freezing is also well corrected (the color of the contrasting areas of confusion is green and purple). The most noticeable vignetting is at 200mm and f / 4, but disappears when the aperture is closed. Visually, in real photographs, the distortion is difficult to notice, at the same time the Nikon 70-200 / 4G still has a little distortion.
The strongest disadvantage of the lens, I think, is not the best work in backlight and side light. In backlight, the lens creates a noticeable set of flares; in side light, it can fill part of the image with a white veil. In this case, the hood does not really help out. Most likely, the average backlight performance is due to the large number of lenses in the optical design of the lens. And, unfortunately, the letter 'N', which is just supposed to deal with flare, is useless in this case. When I was writing this review, I noticed that all class 70 (80) -200 / 2.8 telephones, like this Nikon 70-200 / 4G, do not use aspherical elements in their optical scheme.
Nikon 70-200 / 4G blurs the background well when shooting portraits and has unobtrusive bokeh. Bokeh even on covered diaphragms remains quite pleasant. At times, pictures at 200 mm F / 4 are difficult to distinguish from 200 mm F / 2.8.
Sample photos on Nikon 70-200 / 4G
In the gallery below there are examples of both full-length Nikon FX cameras and Nikon DX cropped cameras:
You can download RAW source files at this link (80 files in '.NEF' and '.RAF' format, 1100 MB). All photos are on-camera JPEG. All photos were taken on Nikon D700 и Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro using a hood.
The sizes of the Nikon N AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm 1: 4G ED SWM VR IF Nano Crystal Coat and Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 18-200mm 1: 3.5-5.6G ED SWM VR IF Aspherical
My experience
Me really liked the Nikon 70-200 / 4G, although it is difficult to surprise or please me with high-quality optics. In short, Nikon 70-200 / 4G is great!
At the cost of the new Nikon 70-200 / 4G, you can easily buy a new one Nikon ED AF Nikkor 80-200mm 1: 2.8D MKIII, and many users will puzzle over which lens to purchase. On the one hand, the Nikon 70-200 / 4G has an amazing stabilizer, a built-in motor, convenient focusing, N-enlightenment and other goodies, on the other hand Nikon 80-200 / 2.8D MKIII 1 stop lighter. Leave your thoughts on choosing a lens in the comments.
Nikon N AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm 1: 4G ED SWM VR IF Nano Crystal Coat
Prices
Nikon N AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm 1: 4G ED SWM VR IF Nano Crystal Coat Actual Prices can be viewed here, or in the price block below:
All Original Similar Nikon FX Telephoto Lenses
Below is a list of all Nikon Nikkor telephoto lenses without high aperture and with auto focus support:
- Nikon AF Nikkor 70-210mm 1: 4, 1986-1987
- Nikon AF Nikkor 70-210mm 1:4-5.6, 1987-1993
- Nikon AF Nikkor 75-300mm 1:4.5-5.6, 1989-1998
- Nikon AF Nikkor 80-200mm 1:4.5-5.6D, 1991-1999
- Nikon AF Nikkor 70-210mm 1:4-5.6D, 1993-2000
- Nikon AF Micro Nikkor 70-180mm 1: 4.5-5.6D ED, 1997-2005
- Nikon AF Nikkor 75-240mm 1:4.5-5.6D, 1999-2000
- Nikon AF Nikkor 70-300mm 1:4-5.6D ED, 1998-2006
- Nikon AF Nikkor 70-300mm 1:4-5.6D, 1998-2006 (?)
- Nikon AF Nikkor 70-300mm 1:4-5.6G, from 2000 to 2014, black or silver
- Nikon AF S Nikkor 70-300mm 1:4.5-5.6G ED VR IF SWM, from 2006 to 2017
- Nikon AF S Nikkor 70-200mm 1: 4G ED SWM VR IF N Nano Crystal Coat, from 2012 to the present day
- Nikon AF-P Nikkor 70-300mm 1:4.5-5.6E VR ED, 2017 to present
The names of the lenses are indicated according to their spelling on the case.
The most similar modern lens is Tokina VCM-S AT-X PRO SD 70-200 F4 (IF) FX N / AIS.
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.
Enlightenment lens Nikon 70-200mm 1: 4G VR AF-S ED IF N
Results
Nikon 70-200 / 4G is a great lens, almost perfect. The build quality, visuals and functioning are at a high level. Of the minor flaws, only the work in the backlight and the absence of a tripod foot in the delivery set are striking. In the end, I would like to separately note a very good image stabilizer and an excellent sharp picture.
Have you read the review of this lens to the end or looked at examples of photos? Then be sure to share this information on social networks.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
the lens is very good, you can shoot “almost macro” with 0.95m mdf. In the backlight, it really turns out garbage. This is probably the only drawback, but it seems like telephones are, in principle, more sensitive to this.
I used a Chinese tripod foot for a canon of the same inner diameter. I only had to glue masking tape inside it in a couple of layers and mark the portrait / landscape orientation with a pencil. In principle, such a "revision" fully justifies the difference in cost with the native foot. There is also a Chinese one for nikon, but it is one and a half to two times Chinese for a canon and one fig is not the original, but you can still try it. In general, the problem is solvable.
Reply
although in the review 1m it is written ... where I read about 90 or 95 cm I do not remember. maybe I'm wrong. In any case, it gives a very good picture at this distance at 200mm focal length.
Reply
In the instructions, as well as on the scale of the lens, a value of 1 meter is clearly indicated. Perhaps somewhere else is written, as the scale has marks in feet, which in terms of meters can give a slight error. In any case, the maximum coefficient for the macro will be 1: 3,7, which is quite suitable for this kind of lens.
Reply
I'm looking this way. If such a stub + 5 stops, then 1 stop is not a problem. The depth is of course….
Reply
I am racking my brains: buy a 70-300 VR or still spend a lens from this review. On the one hand, the 700-300, judging by the review, including on this site, is a very decent lens, besides, it is 2.5 times cheaper and much more compact, on the other hand, the 70-200 F4 is apparently a flight higher. I puzzled for a long time, maybe it makes sense to go broke on the 70-200 2.8 of the latest version, but still the toad strangled, and then (and this is the main thing) I realized that I simply could not carry such a bandura with me and it was not really needed. What would you advise an amateur?
Reply
Look towards 70-200 2.8 VR of the first version. He is iron and indestructible.
In tactile comparison, this F4 is plastic.
But the money is the same.
Reply
that very very heavy bandura
if you decide on this, then you need to decide to the end and, squeaky heart, buy the latest version
Reply
Ivan, they say something is wrong with the first version 70-200? Did you work with him? I was just offered, I think to take or not
Reply
70-300VR is a very good glass, as an amateur I am very pleased with it.
Perhaps, by the speed of focusing, he bores through the lens from this review, but you cannot call it slow.
Aperture: 70 mm 1 / 4,5 against 1/4 is less than half a stop, 200 mm 1 / 5,3 (approximately) against 1/4 is also less than one stop. That is, the difference in aperture ratio is small.
+ 100mm focal length
+ less weight and dimensions: the lens enters vertically into the average photo bag.
For example, it will fit into my photo bag: a carcass with baht. block and whale 18-105, lens 70-300, flash SB-900, any fifty dollars, + small things (a couple of batteries, keys, phone, a couple of filters, a cable.), and for a two-three-hour walk it’s no longer necessary to take a backpack.
Reply
that's how it is, but a man is not a single aperture alive
the picture at 70-20 1/4 is somehow more pleasant than at 70-300, and all high-aperture class 70 (80) -200 1 / 2.8 lenses are too bulky to carry around with you
although I will not argue, apparently 70-300 out of competition in terms of price-quality ratio
Reply
Indeed, the choice is difficult. At one time I took 70-300 rubles and, in general, was pleased with it, even without regard to the low price. He believed that one should not expect more from the telezoom, and a small increase in the aperture ratio would not give much convenience. But I recently bought a Canon 70-200 2.8 lis2 and realized that the Nikon 70-300vr is now out of work. Yes, one and a half kilos is hard to carry with me, but for the sake of such a picture I am a lot :) And also convenience - you can shoot indoors thanks to the aperture and stub. At 70-300 BP I rarely took pictures indoors or in the evening, but now it's easy, even with the light of lanterns at night it is possible. Sharpness is a separate topic. I was always sure that the sharpness zoom merges the fixes outright, I remember even a slight disappointment with the sharpness of 24-70 2.8L (it is good, but far from fixing). But the 70-200 is ideally cut open from corner to corner. Judging by the tests and reviews, Nikon's 70-200 2.8vr2 is only slightly inferior to Canon's in sharpness, so you can safely take it. Smother the toad - then you will thank yourself. In fact, after buying a 70-200 2.8 lis2, I realized that I didn't need 135 2.0l and 85 1.2l - most of the tasks of these fixes can be done with a zoom. Portraits come out gorgeous, sports have become easier to shoot, any report lends itself to shooting at ease. I thought that the overpayment for one stop and stub (I had 70-200 4L) was too high, but now I understand that I don't need more telephoto cameras - 70-200 with 2.8 aperture covers all the needs in the TV range. I kept myself only a super televik and 85 1.8 in case of light portrait photography (for example, taking a 70-200 for a hike in the forest for several days is not an easy task, and it will be a pity if you die). If, before buying a telephoto with 2.8, I would advise you not to chase the aperture ratio, now, having tested the capabilities of such glass, I advise, if possible, to strangle the toad with all available means and buy this glass.
P.S. It’s a pity the site does not have the “test visit” service :))) I would gladly give Arkady a few Canon glasses for testing, reviews of which are not yet available on the site.
Reply
What can I say ... In choosing between 70-300 f4.5-5.6 and VR 70-200 f4, I chose the latter! And he did not regret it at all. Sharp to madness, the picture pleases. Since I'm used to my 17-50 2.8 sigma, the difference in aperture ratio is certainly felt, especially in the evening or indoors. Well, after all, the 70-300 is still sadder, but at the 70-200 2.8 I'm somehow not mentally ready. Yes, frankly speaking, such a focal point is not really necessary in the room (not in our apartments).
The first days were very uncomfortable, as the camera (7100) lay on its belly with an edge and painfully pressed, even printed a bruise. I found a simple way out - I hung it upside down, with a shoe to the body, now it hangs calmly downward with a lens, evenly distributing the weight over the belly, and for shooting you can twist the belt.
Most of the inconvenience is the need to change lenses from time to time and carry all this hardware, but there is nothing to be done.
Reply
By the way, folks, can someone advise where to get a suitable tripod foot? And then to give such grandmothers for their own - this is a clinic.
Reply
With a caliper, measure the diameter in the desired part of the lens and go to AUTO or EBAY.
I did this with the regular Tokina - everything worked.
Reply
I’m thinking, maybe someone came across a specific model will advise
Reply
http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2047675.m570.l1313.TR0.TRC0.H0.XRT-1+for+NIKON+70-+200mm.TRS0&_nkw=RT-1+for+NIKON+70-+200mm&_sacat=0
Reply
Thank you, I will know what is starting from
Reply
A very boring reportage drawing, the old man 80-200 looks more portrait, and even 70-210 who are older than half of the site visitors have their own unique picture.
Reply
And what is “boring drawing” and “funny drawing” ??? And what is the actual difference? Can you give paired examples? Let's do an experiment. The conditions are as follows; - one carcass, uniform lighting conditions, one scene and distance, the closest focal and aperture values, but DIFFERENT LENSES. We will post all the photos for comparison and start looking for “the uniqueness of the picture”. What to look for ???? In Malevich's "black square", some also see amazing notes of the highest art; - almost an orgasm…. and someone considers this creation of the master a mockery of painting .... In photography, LIGHT draws and creates a drawing, and the quality of the transfer is determined by the lens. In my opinion, sucking on the topic “boring, unique, reportage” drawing; - idle chatter and nothing more.
Reply
this is just your OBM.
However, as is the opinion about the drawings of lenses.
To consider the “square” in the absence of the context of its appearance is amateurishness.
Reply
Specifically, with examples, you can express an opinion about the "pictures"? And then one poetry. And I don’t consider Malevich’s “square” at all ... I don’t like to do nonsense in vain. Enlighten the dilettante, show my dear, what is the difference and how to distinguish a boring drawing from a unique one.
Reply
* shrug
and the drawings of the lenses are poetry.
Well, don't take photos - there is a shortage of turners in the country.
Reply
Lynx, "drawings" of lenses - this is not poetry, but verbiage. I can't tell you about the bewitching magic of the “unique drawing”, but it's a pity ... Do not engage in chatter.
Reply
No, in fact, I have long since stepped out of the ranks of those who are trying to explain the meaning of a rainbow to an earthworm.
Therefore, I do not spend time on these attempts
Reply
This is what (about the rainbow) you started doing at the beginning of the thread, and at the end, when there was nothing more to say, you said the opposite.
Reply
Well, it seems that this topic has already been sucked many times, and in principle it should be clear that all the “unique drawings” of lenses are just flaws in the processing of optical glass and their totality in the set that makes up the lens. After all, no one argues with foam at the mouth whose drawing is better than an iPhone or Samsung or E-Ji, there are one or two tiny pieces of glass that determine only the focal length, the rest is done by the matrix and the processor.
If someone likes to romanticize glass sets, why not?
Reply
In fact, you do not want to admit that all these colorful “legendary”, “vivid artistic drawing”, “fabulous dregs”, as well as “warm tube sound” were invented by TORGASHI in order to fool people and breed them to babaos. Rub in for unimaginable money outdated old stuff. Be careful, comrades! Don't be fooled by the bourgeoisie ..
Reply
Alexander, the first time I got a good sense of what a drawing is when I took a picture on the D700 with 50mm f / 1.4d at an aperture, it seems, 2.0. In the foreground there were tree trunks, and everything that fell into the blur zone behind them - the path of the park, foliage and people. All these objects looked like they were painted with a brush - soft and beautiful. When I shot such scenes with a simple zoom, there was no such impression - just dull spots, the gaze does not stop at them. Although the sharpness in both versions was quite enough. There are no paired pictures, so I will not post any links - I see no point.
And one more thing - you have taken a funny position: “Prove to me, let's take paired shots !!”. Do you think someone cares about what you believe in, and now everyone will run to shoot to prove the existence of the drawing? If you want to draw conclusions - take two lenses yourself - with a picture and a zoom - and experiment.
Reply
Yuri, you misunderstood me in this case. I absolutely do not want to be proved to ME. You can say anything without words, but it turned out to be very difficult to confirm with facts. I have already proved everything to myself in practice; - maybe I was wrong? For example, you have a good shot on the D700 with a fifty-kopeck piece at aperture 2.0 could be compared to EASY ZOOM at aperture…. 2.0! On a full-frame body ... aperture 2.0 ... .. sorry, but this is not a SIMPLE zoom at all, this is a SUPER zoom. I have never held this in my hands. According to Zhvanetsky, if, then ... "more careful, comrades, more thorough!" The lynx disappointed somewhat; - roughly hinting at my limited inner world, comparison with a worm that does not understand the meaning of a rainbow ... not beautiful. But Yarkiy quite lucidly and honestly expressed his point of view and it is difficult to disagree with him; - in the imperfection of optics, you can, if you wish, see something unusual (and after the second can of pivasik there is already a sort of artistic ...)
Reply
It's not just 2.0 - and at 2.8, the beauty of the picture is usually visible, although, naturally, the blur zone will be smaller. And there are plenty of facts - just go to some pixelpeeper.com and compare pictures from top-end glasses and budget glasses close in focal lengths, for example, 55-200 and 80-200. You immediately feel that on the top end, the blur is completely different, etc.
Reply
Yes, nothing at all fell to you there to prove with facts.
Your opinion here does not matter to anyone.
humble yourself.
Reply
Why are you so nervous? The ability to be rude doesn’t color you, and narcissism is all the more red
Reply
yes dragging then no one is nervous anywhere.
Skills are a useful thing, useful in life.
Reply
Maybe. The current is unclear, why are you in general ahead; - the question was not addressed to you. Do you want to be smart? And for everyone it is not worth expressing an opinion; - don't take too much on yourself. With a big pretense you are a boy ... for infallibility, calm down your pride.
Reply
This was not an expression of opinion, but a dry statement of the observed facts.
And this is a free site - your instructions to whom, where to speak and what is not worth a damn.
Do not confuse banal banter over human narrow-mindedness with pride.
Reply
Well, I would say right away…. How could I know that on this free site there are such banal banter. Now it's all clear.
Reply
Here the situation is probably in the fact that a non-expensive fixed lens can give an interesting picture as well as a top zoom. Well, the lenses of the 55-200 series are dark and do not particularly pretend to anything, although they do have a boske in the picture. Well, in general, price matters in photography
Reply
Here the story was banal, the thread began with a comparison of two zooms, and I quite understand Alexander. I also understand the language: "More blur and rounder", but "boring drawing" - no.
Reply
Important: the lens has a special place on its body for mounting a tripod cap. Unfortunately the foot….
Here is a grave
Reply
I have this glass. sharp, fast, contrasting !!!! But yes, not 2,8. but taking into account for reporting where there is light (new cameras allow you to raise the ISO), or in the presence of a flash - great! Yes, and the hand does not get very tired from the weight))
Reply
I, too, after 80-200 MK II lean more towards this F4, which is 450 grams lighter, even in the daytime with such a mass it is difficult to keep it from stirring. After acquiring a 16-35 F4, which can be removed even at night with a stub, I stopped doubting for myself in favor of a stub.
Reply
Hello photography lovers! I tried 80-200 f2.8 MK3 on a D 800 camera. I liked it, it blurred the background and that’s it. In terms of sharpness on modern cameras, it does not give that sharpness (does not allow the matrix), like modern G-series lenses, just to say D-series are sharpened by film. For modern matrices, new modern G series are needed. I bought a 70-200 F4 VR, naturally I tried it first. Sharp already on f4, the stabilizer works fine. I shot at a distance of 50 meters at f4 200mm with my daughter’s hands on the bridge, so for those who like to consider super sharpness at 100 magnification! In a room where there is little light nor any problems at a slow shutter speed. He showed himself excellently in a performance in a room; it is dark on the stage; the light is constantly changing i.e. lighter or darker. Autofocus is fast and accurate, the pictures are all sharp for the entire duration of the performance, I got great pictures and a great mood from the lens. Portraits are gorgeous, the background is beautifully blurred; you want to blur more; increase the focal length. Universal lens, want a portrait in any conditions, please report, please, want to be a paparazzi, please! Who wants quality fixation for God's sake is your choice, I mean from 85mm and more. It was 85 mm f1.8 G sharp but the HA is a nightmare and you run closer and further. For 80-200 f2 / 8 you need a short shutter speed or increase ISO, and this is noise or take a tripod and drag it like a fool with a stupa, and dust and dirt climb into the camera through the lens mount! It's my opinion !!! Nikon N AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm 1: 4G ED SWM VR IF Nano Crystal Coa Gorgeous Lens !!!
Reply
completely + since it’s also in conjunction with the 800th and fine.
Reply
Needed for outdoor photo sessions. Tell me which one is better. 70-200 4G or 80-200 MK4
Reply
In nature, with enough lighting, 80-200 mk4 I liked more.
Reply
“There is no exact confirmation from official sources that Nikon 70-200 / 4G is a dust- and moisture-resistant lens. At the same time, I tend to think that because of this rubber seal, the lens still has basic dust and moisture protection. ”
I testify that I bought this lens in a large local retail chain with a 30% discount, the reason is a fire in the trading floor where the lens was exhibited, the ingress of burning soot on the goods. The product works great. Soot fire is not a test.
Reply
Thanks for the unusual addition :)
Reply
Arkady, why sharpness at nine? Is it possible to talk about the sharpness of the lens itself at such a value of software oversharpening. a maximum of three should be set to sharpness in the camera. Praising readers, where are you looking?
Reply
I have already explained this. There is RAW, you can set any sharpness to any value and evaluate it yourself, in fact, as I did. And here, in the review, examples are still reaped up to 2 mp
Reply
On RAW. And we advise you
Reply
This topic has already been discussed in raw no nine
Reply
Download ravs and open in Nikon's nx2, look at how much sharpness there is in files. Then move it to the top three and you will see soap
Reply
In my profile, I often have a sharpness of +9, and indeed I'm a very big fan of tweaking the shooting profiles in order to immediately get a good result, in my opinion. There are certain tricks.
A little lyrical digression about why I use these or other profile settings:
During a commercial shoot, I need to immediately show a beautiful result to the client. All the shootings that relate to work, I am doing with profiles that wind up sharpness and saturation. Shooting always takes place in RAW. This is done for the following reasons:
1. The client needs to show immediately ready and beautiful picture. On a small camera display, it’s not always clear what and where. And the better = sharper / richer the picture - the happier and calmer the client.
2. During the development of RAW files using third-party converters, all these settings are reset, or rather, are not perceived by non-native software. As a result, you can watch the “naked” RAW and twist it to your own taste - with smooth color, contrast and the desired sharpness. In native converters, you can also reset all the settings to default, which, in fact, can be done with RAW images in this review.
3. Everything is removed with a clear understanding that everything will be wrong in the converter. Over the years, this approach has been developed.
4. It is very important to disable ADL, otherwise it becomes very difficult to display RAW with the same LIGHTROOM.
5. The camera initially sees neither color, nor light, nor sharpness - it only sees the Bayer pattern and any (any!) Picture that the user looks at on the camera’s display and / or converter is a mathematical restoration of the original real image projected by the lens. In fact, no one sees bare RAW files, because there is always debayerization with a certain adjustment. Which setting is correct and true - no answer. Why LR sets the base sharpe 25%, and not 30% or 0%, no one will say, it just happened so historically and this is considered to be a “real raw file”. Or why the basic sharpness in the 'SD' profile is +3, and in the 'NL' +2, and what is “more correct” - a standard profile or a neutral one?
6. The final picture is just a set of tricky algorithms for debayerization with the addition of thousands of enhancements. For example, LR uses lens profiles (compensates for distortion and vignetting), uses a camera profile (adjusts color for Bayerization, color channels and other subtleties, such as HUE shift depending on shadows / lights). All this is a math beat game.
7. When shooting with different equipment, I was forced to train myself to achieve or try to achieve a good result from any camera. By manipulating the huge toolkit of the converters, I was convinced that there were no bad color cameras. All these “blues, greens, warm” are just bits and bytes, sliders and percentages of the converter. I agree that in JPEG, cameras give different results, but I have not seen a single camera from whose RAW file you can’t get a good / satisfactory result.
About the lens features:
Therefore, historically, I also use profiles to my liking for the review in order to get a good result right away. Unlike commercial shooting, for Nikon reviews I additionally include ADL, which visually expands DD (and some other enhancements). The original converters understand the profile settings and convert based on them. The trick is that there are no "basic settings". Everything that the viewer sees is already processing. everything! The previews in the review are a vivid confirmation of this, because only 1/5 of the original data remains from the original image (downsize, lowering the quality in JPEG using sublimation of colors, increasing compression, etc.). One of the tricks is that the built-in ViewNX-I sharpens the picture better than shooting with the same parameters in JPEG. Typically ViewNX-I grains bokeshku due to oversharp. But at low ISO the picture visually becomes even better at times. I described it in detail here.
The capabilities of the lens are viewed in RAW files using third-party converters that can reset "improvers" and profiles. Therefore, if I write something about the lens, then this is my average weighted opinion based on the source, settings, shooting conditions, etc.
This is done in order to understand the lens and immediately get a good / acceptable result. Because sometimes there is sharpe / oversharp (everything is combed under one comb), at the same time there is an objective vision of what is happening.
About "soap". Everything is very simple here. There are also several factors.
1.From any lens, when you lower the sharp from 9 to 3, it will visually seem that the 3-ke lens sucks. Visual comparison - no more. Therefore, you need to watch everything at once with the sharp that you consider acceptable for yourself.
2. Professional reviewers make tests the world, this can partially allow in rare cases to evaluate and compare the lens with other similar ones, to draw certain conclusions. Historically, my blog does not deal with worlds, tables, and technical tests. There are several reasons for this: many have worlds and brick walls, and live photos can not always be found among surveyors. Also, worlds and tables, in my opinion, very much distract amateur photos from live photography, forcing them to spend hours staring at dashes and circles rather than doing photography.
3. Well, and lastly, there is a contingent of users who always and everywhere sees “soap”. Whether users still do not fully understand the principle of operation of optics (different grips at different focusing distances), or they simply expect a miracle sometimes from cheap optics. As for this 70-200 / 4, it cannot be called soapy. Its resolution is at a high level and it is quite difficult to argue with this.
Reply
Detail, thanks. I tried to play with profiles, it really became more interesting to look on the screen, it became more pleasant to show models and they were calmer. Thank you very much. I didn’t think about this before.
Reply
For this, I appreciate your reviews. I'm just terribly upset if, when I search for a lens in Google, it does not give out links to your reviews. Technical reviews are not interesting to me, and sometimes even incomprehensible. I just want to understand how this glass captures portraits and landscapes, to see the construction and the absence of a vacuum cleaner. Your flowers, of course, are touching, but as for me, they are the same in all reviews))) No offense.) But on street, portrait photos and buildings you answer all my internal questions! Thank you very much!
Reply
Very sharp and compact lens. After 70-200vrI in my hand like a toy. I was amazed when from 20-25 meters with a focal length of 200mm on the open one it was possible to count all the cilia. The drawing is very correct and a bit harsh, less ductile than that of 70-200vrI. The image is bright, contrast and juicy. I think that buying him a light 85s will be very useful for me.
Reply
The 80-200 / 2.8 mk3 is also pretty sharp on the D610 with its 24mp. From 15 meters you can also look at the eyelashes and even see when the makeup artist uses the right makeup, and where the model herself was painted and there are lumps on the eyelashes (=
Reply
By the way, in the flesh to ...
Reply
Dear Arkady, if you dig a little, you will find out that the letter N means a nanocrystalline coating on the rear lens, which reduces or eliminates glare and reflections from the camera’s matrix. Thank you for the review.
Reply
Lend your shovel to Arkady)
Reply
Thank you, like this is indicated in the review and digging is not particularly necessary
Reply
In general, I had 24 70 2.8, and 35 70 and 28 70 and 70 200 2.8 and 80-200 2.8 and even 80 400. And 50mm 1.4 and even 55mm 1.2.
And many other simple ancient ones.
Filmed on d610 d700.
Indeed, 24 70 is more technical. But 70 200 4 liked the most. including because of the size. But the picture is good.
Lamp or something. Although sharp as a sickle blow.
Now he's gone to sleepyheads. There, too, was a native 70 200 4. Not at all.
But there are probably more complaints about a7 and a7s. As a result, I want to return to Nikon.
I hope z6 and 70 200 4 will be like d610 on it.
Reply
I think the closest analogue to this lens at the moment is the Tamron 70-210mm f/4 VC USD, which has been around for at least a couple of years. Moreover, they are very similar in structure. It's funny that this glass does not seem to be mentioned anywhere on this resource. Although it is several times cheaper than Nikkor, it is not much inferior to it in terms of image quality. I speak from personal experience. I would be very happy to see a review of this lens on Radozhiv
Reply
I bought this glass after I visited this site. I really like it in conjunction with the D800. The lens works one hundred percent. I use it as a staffer. There are many pluses. you can find an acceptable copy for sane money.
Reply