just stole a nikon 70-200 vr ii, not really but got it cheap i think

yes.. there is some definite loss in contrast and sharpness, but not bad unless you print LARGE or pixel peep. Of course, what is good is very subjective to different people too! I would rather fill the frame at 400mm than crop at 200mm (usually)...

 

oh yeah earned $37 in ebay bucks too, forgot about that. love ebay bucks, but hate ebay fees, i guess thats why i do more buying then selling on ebay now. ebay sucks for sellers nowadays

i might just put those bucks towards a teleconverter. whats the main difference between the II and the III, just a newer model or actually better optics? i guess with any new model optics are a little better, but not sure if its worth the extra price. these nikon converters are not cheap... thats for sure.

i guess my sigma apo 1.4x autofocus teleconverter would work for testing.

 

Darn you.. I just paid around that for a VRI.. used it for the first time today. I can't believe what a difference it is from the Sigma 70-200 I have been using.. it's incredible.

 

Yep, i picked it up last night. Its in perfect shape and even has a 3 year extended warrenty through b&h along with the nikon 5 year.

 

On the Sigmas (and other third parties)... if you get a good copy.. you may get excellent sharpness (or not)! But I have yet to see a third party that focuses as accurately or as fast, as the native Nikon's do (at least in the top end lenses)

 

You're going to LOVE that lens!!!!!!!!

 

i tend to agree, except the tokina lens i have focuses fast and very accurate. i hate to say it, but i dont think im going to buy any more 3 party glass unless its tokina, and really they dont make any other lens i want except for maybe the 105 macro, which i hear is pretty good.