Best Deals nikon 70 200 f2 8 g ed if af s vr

I don’t understand anything less than a 5 star review for this lens., November 17, 2008

By 

Kate Stokes (Atlanta, GA) – See all my reviews

  

I’m sorry, I just can’t understand ratings that aren’t 5/5 for this lens. It flat out rocks. Let me just get a few things straight regarding this lens vs. the newer 24-70mm lens that replaced it:

1. This lens is more stout than the 24-70mm, yes, but it is also noticeably shorter which to me is preferable. This means it has a nearer/lower center of gravity and is easier to manage for long periods of time. The 24-70mm is basically like handling a telephoto zoom (i.e. 70-200mm or 80-200mm) with its center of gravity further out, harder to handle for long periods and easier to knock into people with.

2. The 24-70mm is a very sharp lens. I understand that. This lens is at least as sharp, however, and in my opinion slightly sharper. This becomes important in point number 3 below.

3. This lens can be picked up for roughly 2/3 the price of the 24-70mm. To me that settles the issue. Now, if the 24-70mm had VR then maybe it would be a different story but it doesn’t. Again the 24-70mm is harder to handle, longer, no sharper and costs at least 50% more ($1,000-ish vs $1,5000-ish)

I hope I have made a good case for getting one of these over the newer 24-70. This is a top notch solid professional battle ready piece of equipment here. Don’t listen to the talk of it being “too big” or “too heavy.” First of all, as I said it’s much easier to maneuver than the longer 24-70, and second of all the heaviness of this lens is overrated. If you are coming from a kit lens yes you will find it heavy. If you are used to shooting with pro glass this will not seem extraordinary heavy. It is in line with professional Canon and Nikon glass I have used over the years in terms of weight. Unless they decide to put VR on the 24-70mm I am not going to take another look at it while I can still find these for 2/3 the price.

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 

Was this review helpful to you? 

>Report abuse
| Permalink

 Comment

Great Lens!, June 12, 2006

By 

R. Cunningham “The Godfather” (Michigan) – See all my reviews

  

I have owned this lens for 2 years and it is by far my most used lens. This is saying quite a bit because I also own the Nikon 28 1.4 and the 85 1.4. Both of those two are outstanding, however the zoom is much more convenient to use.

It is heavy but on the D2H it balances very well.

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 

Was this review helpful to you? 

>Report abuse
| Permalink

 Comment

Excellent quality, very sharp, heavy and very expensive, February 6, 2008

By 

Miguel A. Rodriguez “MigRodz” (North Bay Village, Florida United States) – See all my reviews

  

I have owned this lens for about four years now, and it is my favorite lens. It is built like a tank, very solid construction and very heavy. For maximum sharpness, I recommend using the lens at F/8 for most situations however; at constant f/2.8 the pictures are very sharp also. It does excellent at weddings and studio portrait photography. Distortion is not a great concern however, you may have to use a little distortion correction in Photoshop, or what ever software application you use to edit your pictures, when shooting at 28mm. Distortion at very close range, especially when shooting tall buildings is noticeable. The lens has a tendency to flare very easily including at night. Nothing that can’t be fixed in Photoshop but, flare can be avoided by paying a little more attention. I rate this lens 9 out of 10. I will love to see this lens in a VR version in the future.

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 

Was this review helpful to you? 

>Report abuse
| Permalink

 Comment