- Messages
- 11,048
- Name
- Adam
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Well, the time has come for me to spend more money than I ever thought I would on a lens.... I've recently pulled every recourse I had to pay off the mortgage after 24 years of hard slog...I actually came In ON budget.
(quietly celebrating that fact, your welcome to join me
) ...which means I still have the savings (since joining this forum a year ago lol. ...I blame you guys for this expense BTW
) ... to purchase a Nikon 70-200 AF-S VR IF lens, filters and stuff.
So now I'm scared ...Is this lens the right choice, its flipping expensive… and I can’t claim for it on my expenses.
I've done loads of research, and learnt loads, seems cannon where not the first with image stabilising after all...seems Nikon had one In a wee point and shoot a decade ago...then before that Carl Zeiss and plenty of others especially in the film world.
Its a stunningly sharp lens across the board … no doubts about that on any reviews, some reviewers even go so far as to say its sharper than a few Nikon primes...well, that sounds good enough for me.. It’s also just fine with a 1.4 converter, the loss in stops making little difference compared to similar lenses.
I know nothing about colour rendition, so I'll assume Nikon know what there doing etc.
Its design is a joy to use apparently, no external movement, AF is fast everywhere, The VR works a treat and has different flaws and advances than the cannons, they all just come down to a 'using technique' , nothing more.
Sounds brilliant, and it is brilliant it seems...but it does have some flaws; some reviews have said its 1.5 meter minimum distance is slightly too long...Oh well, I'll have to change lenses, no problem.
But my main worry is the possible flare when shooting into the sun. Many of the reviewers test images have been truly appalling, with the subject being totally lost in a blur of white or a multitude of lens reflections across the frame.
I'm obviously taking my photography seriously to consider a lens like this...and like many others here, I've considered earning a living from photography, this lens is perhaps a step towards that end...as I’m assuming it will last years, and is certain clarity will not be a disadvantage in the future should I turn to making a living with it.
So…how bad is the flare problem in reality…just a small disadvantage compared to the whole package??…or should I be considering something else???
Just after your thoughts and user info really guys…perhaps with a hint of reassurance. I’m fairly fixed on buying this next week sometime… unless someone can talk me out of it…
Excuse the waffle peeps...just going through justifing the expence to myself I think.
) ...which means I still have the savings (since joining this forum a year ago lol. ...I blame you guys for this expense BTW So now I'm scared ...Is this lens the right choice, its flipping expensive… and I can’t claim for it on my expenses.
I've done loads of research, and learnt loads, seems cannon where not the first with image stabilising after all...seems Nikon had one In a wee point and shoot a decade ago...then before that Carl Zeiss and plenty of others especially in the film world.
Its a stunningly sharp lens across the board … no doubts about that on any reviews, some reviewers even go so far as to say its sharper than a few Nikon primes...well, that sounds good enough for me.. It’s also just fine with a 1.4 converter, the loss in stops making little difference compared to similar lenses.
I know nothing about colour rendition, so I'll assume Nikon know what there doing etc.
Its design is a joy to use apparently, no external movement, AF is fast everywhere, The VR works a treat and has different flaws and advances than the cannons, they all just come down to a 'using technique' , nothing more.
Sounds brilliant, and it is brilliant it seems...but it does have some flaws; some reviews have said its 1.5 meter minimum distance is slightly too long...Oh well, I'll have to change lenses, no problem.
But my main worry is the possible flare when shooting into the sun. Many of the reviewers test images have been truly appalling, with the subject being totally lost in a blur of white or a multitude of lens reflections across the frame.
I'm obviously taking my photography seriously to consider a lens like this...and like many others here, I've considered earning a living from photography, this lens is perhaps a step towards that end...as I’m assuming it will last years, and is certain clarity will not be a disadvantage in the future should I turn to making a living with it.
So…how bad is the flare problem in reality…just a small disadvantage compared to the whole package??…or should I be considering something else???
Just after your thoughts and user info really guys…perhaps with a hint of reassurance. I’m fairly fixed on buying this next week sometime… unless someone can talk me out of it…
Excuse the waffle peeps...just going through justifing the expence to myself I think.

... early next year sounds good too.