Has anyone used the Nikon 70-200 f2.8 vr II and the Canon 70-200L IS II

[jaomul]

It's in a way comparing apples with oranges, and I am not going to jump a system for a single lens. I got to get a good play with the canon on a 7d mark ii and it is in a word great. I own a nikon d7200, would the nikon version be as good

(I know a few here have dual systems or migrated from one system to another, hopefully I'll get some user experience input)

 

[goodguy]

I shoot events with a guy who has a Canon 6D which is always coupled to the Canon 70-200mm 2.8 II
It really is pointless to give definitive answer but from looking close to my D750 with the Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 VC and his files I really honestly cant see any real difference when talking about lenses performance, both are mind blowing good!!!

Not exactly what you are asking for but thats as close as I can get and its real life experience.

 

[jaomul]

I shoot events with a guy who has a Canon 6D which is always coupled to the Canon 70-200mm 2.8 II
It really is pointless to give definitive answer but from looking close to my D750 with the Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 VC and his files I really honestly cant see any real difference when talking about lenses performance, both are mind blowing good!!!

Not exactly what you are asking for but thats as close as I can get and its real life experience.

Thanks

I have no doubt any of these lenses will be very good image quality wise etc, especially when used on a crop camera.

The Canon was blazingly fast and accurate, certainly the best zoom I ever took a shot off.

 

[goodguy]

I shoot events with a guy who has a Canon 6D which is always coupled to the Canon 70-200mm 2.8 II
It really is pointless to give definitive answer but from looking close to my D750 with the Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 VC and his files I really honestly cant see any real difference when talking about lenses performance, both are mind blowing good!!!

Not exactly what you are asking for but thats as close as I can get and its real life experience.

Thanks

I have no doubt any of these lenses will be very good image quality wise etc, especially when used on a crop camera.

The Canon was blazingly fast and accurate, certainly the best zoom I ever took a shot off.

These lenses work well on both FF and APS-C, I used my Tamron on D7100 and now on D3300. Great lenses for a lot of of scenarios both FF and APS-C

 

[JacaRanda]

Pretty sure T. Campbell has the Canon 70-200 2.8 II. Hopefully he chimes in. I used it for about 5 minutes I think on my 60d, but that's not enough to comment.
However, the person that it belongs to says 'awesome'. Can't miss, can't live without as long as price and weight are not factors.

 

[Overread]

I've only used the Canon and its a fantastic lens. I had the previous version and that was a great lens too - the MII improves in nearly all areas. It's not a night and day difference though, but you can certainly notice its improved performance over the original (I notice it most in how it can take teleconverts a lot better).

The only thing I think I recall regarding the Nikon is that it reduces its focal length quite a lot as it focuses closer than infinity. In truth though these are top end lenses, the differences will be marginal and more nitpicky.

You might also find that its only on review sites and review photographers/boggers that you'll find an answer - most can't afford to own both systems at once to that level of gear, nor need to. Some have made a change although from memory we don't have a huge number who've high end jumped ship between the two

 

[goodguy]

All 70-200mm 2.8 are very close to each other, Nikon, Tamron and Canon are slightly better then the Sigma but all 4 are very good.
Only main difference is the advantage the Canon has which is in focus breathing, at close range 200mm is reall 200mm while on the other 3 its about 135mm.
I dont find this a huge thing but for some this can be important especially pro portrait users.

 

[Braineack]

looking the at MTFs, the Canon might be sharper in the corners, but the Nikon might have subjectively better bokeh.

 

[jaomul]

looking the at MTFs, the Canon might be sharper in the corners, but the Nikon might have subjectively better bokeh.

You may be right but I prefer to look at pictures

But seriously, I probably should have been more precise with my question, it was more related to speed and accuracy rather than outright image quality

 

[goodguy]

looking the at MTFs, the Canon might be sharper in the corners, but the Nikon might have subjectively better bokeh.

You may be right but I prefer to look at pictures

But seriously, I probably should have been more precise with my question, it was more related to speed and accuracy rather than outright image quality

Again from my experience the Canon and Tamron were both very fast to focus and locked focus reliably. The differences with all these lenses as I said in the past is small, in most cases I just cant see big differences there.
When talking about lenses in this level the limiting factor is probably camera or skills of user.

 

[Overread]

Focusing speed is fast, likely similar and hard to tell them apart.

Focusing accuracy is a camera related property really; it really depends upon the camera behind the lens as the accuracy of the focusing is controlled by the camera. To an extent this also affects focusing speed; whilst the AF motors in the lens do the moving its the camera that tells them how far to move. Thus a camera body with superior AF likely will lock on and track faster and better than a weaker body; especially in more complex scenes or marginal lighting.

 

[jaomul]

Might have to try and give that Tammy a go on my camera