Nikkor 70-200 2.8 VR1 or VR2

SFTPhotography

SFTPhotography

Ranger Smith
Suspended / Banned
Messages
20,926
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
I have a 70-200f4 and I don't think IQ it is quite upto the job so looking to moving up to a 2.8 version.

Which one in users experience is better IQ wise and in particular in terms of edge sharpness is the newer one better?
 
is better across the whole frame than the 2.8 VRII and most only change to the 2.8 for the low light rather than sharpness, I’ve had both and still have the F4 now not used extensively but never been disappointed with the f4
 
What's up with the f4 Steve ? Many reviews have it as sharper than the vr1
 
damianmkv said:
What's up with the f4 Steve ? Many reviews have it as sharper than the vr1
Click to expand...

I think it's a bit soft in the corners, certainly worse than my 24-70 f2.8 which is nothing spectacular but acceptable. Re reading more reviews they say VR2 is the one to go for. I use a D810 which shows up defects in lenses very very well. At the short and long end of the lens it's quite an issue, the mid part of the zoom is ok. It's a bit like the 16-35, a good lens optically but nothing great, I think I can get better.
 
Last edited:
Ah ok..was asking as I'm pondering 2.8s or the f4 for my d500
 
I have been using my F4 fo about a year now. It's a cracking light lens that performs very well. It's sharp on my D750 and can't really fault it.

However I have just made the change to 2.8 as is mainly used for sports and portraits and in low light the difference is quite big.

I know it's only 1 stop, but having done some quick shots in low light it makes a big difference.

I'm going to miss the weight or lack of weight of the F4, but that's about it.

If sharpness is your thing the F4 is super sharp, but there is something about the 2.8 that just looks better.
 
http://panamoz.com/lenses/nikon/nikon-af-s-nikkor-70-200mm-f-2-8g-ed-vr-ii-lens.html

http://panamoz.com/lenses/nikon/nikon-af-s-nikkor-70-200mm-f-2-8e-fl-ed-vr-lens.html

Which one.

I also prefer a more solidly constructed lens, the f4 zooms are a little disappointing in this regard.
JJ! said:
If sharpness is your thing the F4 is super sharp, but there is something about the 2.8 that just looks better.
Click to expand...

It's the whole thing, I know I am going to do this. It is just a case of when :D
 
It's interesting that you say the f4 is worst in the corners than a f2.8 VR2 as the reviews I've read say the opposite. In the review below the corners look to be better at f4 and f5.6 on the 70-200 f4. By f8/f11thet are nearly identical with the f2.8 VR2 probably just edging it (pardon the pun).

https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-70-200mm-f4g-vr

I've recently been thinking of swapping the f2.8 VR2 back to the f4 version but I've yet to really made a decision as I find the VR2 very good for wildlife, just a little heavy for landscapes. this is the second VR2 ive had after I sold the first to help fund a telephoto, I vowed never to sell it as I missed it the first time.

For the price bracket and weight the f4 probably overperfoms. The f2.8s should perform consider the price difference, the downside is the extra weight of f2.8 being nearly double the f4.
 
Last edited:
Ordered the newest 2.8 e version of the lens. Tried it in Jessops. Felt fine hand held, heavy but properly solid but not unmanageable.

I also will use it for portraits and have a few shoots where the wide aperture will be very handy.
 
I had a 70-200 f/2.8 VR1 and sold it on it preference of the f/4. The VR1 isn't the best in the corners, and I was much happier with the f/4 - not to mention it weighs half as much. I'm surprised you weren't happy with the performance of the corners on your one, it's possible you had a bad copy?
 
Stu Meech said:
I had a 70-200 f/2.8 VR1 and sold it on it preference of the f/4. The VR1 isn't the best in the corners, and I was much happier with the f/4 - not to mention it weighs half as much. I'm surprised you weren't happy with the performance of the corners on your one, it's possible you had a bad copy?
Click to expand...

I’m not sure. Remember the d810 has a higher res, these things show more easily. The lens is good really from 90-160mm and that’s it. At 185mm it’s just crap all over.
 
SFTPhotography said:
I’m not sure. Remember the d810 has a higher res, these things show more easily. The lens is good really from 90-160mm and that’s it. At 185mm it’s just crap all over.
Click to expand...
As I say could be a copy thing as I know a few landscapers with D800 series / this lens and never heard or seen any bad reviews on corner performance.
 
My 70-200 F4 was good all the way to F4. Having used the 2.8e today for the first time I had more missed focus shots than when I used the F4.

Was really odd, it just missed focus a couple of times when tracking and whole shot was blurry!
 
JJ! said:
My 70-200 F4 was good all the way to F4. Having used the 2.8e today for the first time I had more missed focus shots than when I used the F4.

Was really odd, it just missed focus a couple of times when tracking and whole shot was blurry!
Click to expand...

Mines off to MPB. It was unsuable at F4 at any focal length, 5.6 and only ok from 7.1. Must be a copy thing as I use my 24-70 at at F5.6 its well, good.
 
SFTPhotography said:
Mines off to MPB. It was unsuable at F4 at any focal length, 5.6 and only ok from 7.1. Must be a copy thing as I use my 24-70 at at F5.6 its well, good.
Click to expand...

They might not accept it after testing it if it's that bad. After all they have to resell it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top