Tamron's new 70-200/2.8 zoom is a very competent lens: It's almost up there with the best Nikon has to offer, even sometimes surpassing the new Nikon 70-200/2.8E VR in image quality. It offers a very effective image stabilization of almost 5 stops even if it could not suppress the mirror-slap of the D810 completely and has a fast and reliable AF.
Nikon Z 70-200mm f/2.8 VR S Review. By Nasim Mansurov 60 Comments ISO 64, 1/15, f/5.6 NIKON Z 7 II + NIKKOR Z 70-200mm f/2.8 VR S @ 70mm, ISO 64, 1/5,
Nikon's first 120-300mm f/2.8. Nikon's first use of an SR glass element (Short-wavelength Refractive, same as Canon's BR Blue Refractive compound) to reduce spherochromatism, also used in the Z 70-200mm f/2.8 introduced the same day. Good. Outstanding optical quality. Programmable front control buttons: AF LOCK, or AF ON, or
NIKON Z 5 + NIKKOR Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR @ 200mm, ISO 200, 1/40, f/8.0. The next page of this review dives into the 24-200mm f/4-6.3’s construction and real-world use in more detail. So, click below to go to the next chapter, “Build quality and handling.” Build Quality and Construction. The Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR is not a heavy-duty
Other than the slight softness and rather high CA from 200-300mm though, the performance of the 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 ED-IF AF-S VR Zoom Nikkor (yeesh, that's a mouthful) was really excellent. And
AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8E FL ED VR. Specifications. Add to Cart. $3,799.00. The new benchmark for fast telephoto zoom lenses, and a powerhouse for low-light, sports, wildlife, concerts, weddings, portraits and everyday shooting. With improvements across the board—optical formula, handling, weather sealing and VR image stabilization—this
From 80mm to 150mm, maybe. But when both lenses are all the way out at the long end (200mm), I think the 70-200 VR II has a noticeable sharpness advantage. You have to pixel peep to see it, but the VR II is definitely sharper. I own the 80-200/2.8 AF-S, and got to try out the 70-200 VR II briefly. The 70-200 also has a slight AF speed advantage.
(100% crop, Nikon D700, Nikon 70-200 VR (mk1) Then again, if you’re very concerned about sharpness and you actually don’t need f/2.8 that desperately, don’t hesitate to get the 70-200mm f/4 VR instead. If you’re a landscape photographer toting around a D800e, for example, the 70-200mm f/4 VR is definitely going to be a fantastic choice.
Nikon Nikkor Z 70-180mm F2.8 Nikon Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 VR S Nikon Nikkor Z 800mm F6.3 VR S Nikon Nikkor Z 85mm F1.2 S Nikon Nikkor Z 85mm F1.8 S Nikon Nikkor Z DX 12-28mm F3.5-5.6 PZ VR Nikon Nikkor Z DX 16-50mm F3.5-6.3 VR
Nikon Z7 II Sony a7R V Sony 70-200mm F2.8 G SSM II Sony FE 200-600 F5.6-6.3 Nikon Z 14-24mm F2.8 +5 more Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain 80-200 ED vs 70-200 2.8 vr1. I recently purchased a Nikon 80-200 2.8 ed paired with a nikon d500 to shoot high school football. The picture quality is incredible, its built like a tank and I love it. However the lens seems to back focus and miss focus more than I would like it to causing me to miss some shots. Nikon Z7 II Nikon Z9 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 600mm f/4G ED VR Nikon Z 24-70mm F2.8 Nikon Z 70-200 F2.8 VR +1 more Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain - two lens set: 70-200 mm f/2.8 + 200 -500 mm f/5.6 1.4kg + 2.3kg lenses. Both can be shot wide open also at the long end with no regret. - tamron or sigma 150-200 f/6.3 at the long end 2 kg or more depending on model. To cover the short tele range probably again the 70-200 f/2.8 on the FX camera. I tested it (actually in controlled conditions to be sure) and found it to be noticeably less sharp than the 70-200 VRII, even at f/2.8. I decided to return the lens after that. The store accepted my test results as evidence for the return by the way. It could be that my 70-200 VRII was exceptionally good, or my 200/2 was exceptionally bad. y7Jt2r.
