Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8 VR 1 vs Nikkor 70-200mm f4 for D7100

[astroNikon]

You keep comparing the 80-200 to the 80-400 Vr. What about the 70-200 2.8 Vr? I have never had my VR limit my abilities on fast moving subjects?

You are correct, certainly the 2.8vr is better than the 4vr, that said I will never buy another VR of any type again. all the VR lenses have off switches for the mechanism, why? Because it is of no help in many conditions. The 80-200,2.8D was out of production and was brought back because it is just better than the 70-200,2.8VR, it is just that simple. I posted photos of what VR produces, and it is no advantage, not to me anyway.

Here we ****ing go again more bullshit

Yup .... instead of locking the threads ... lock the poster ...

He has proved from his linked photos he doesn't know how to focus so blames the lens

Maybe the lack of IQ and nailing focus is from his camera body .. upgrade time.

 

[astroNikon]

You keep comparing the 80-200 to the 80-400 Vr. What about the 70-200 2.8 Vr? I have never had my VR limit my abilities on fast moving subjects?

You are correct, certainly the 2.8vr is better than the 4vr, that said I will never buy another VR of any type again. all the VR lenses have off switches for the mechanism, why? Because it is of no help in many conditions. The 80-200,2.8D was out of production and was brought back because it is just better than the 70-200,2.8VR, it is just that simple. I posted photos of what VR produces, and it is no advantage, not to me anyway.

Here we ****ing go again more bullshit

Yup .... instead of locking the threads ... lock the poster ...

He has proved from his linked photos he doesn't know how to focus so blames the lens

The camera and lens are supposed to do the focusing, but my focus is fine, as long as no VR is used on action. Most Viewed Try and get this with a VR lock..... 13857794494_a2450a2b92_o The photographer has to make decisions that no fuzzy logic software can.....

not supposed to use VR above 1/500 or there-abouts .. read the manual.

BTW ... What focus modes were you using

 

[gsgary]

You keep comparing the 80-200 to the 80-400 Vr. What about the 70-200 2.8 Vr? I have never had my VR limit my abilities on fast moving subjects?

You are correct, certainly the 2.8vr is better than the 4vr, that said I will never buy another VR of any type again. all the VR lenses have off switches for the mechanism, why? Because it is of no help in many conditions. The 80-200,2.8D was out of production and was brought back because it is just better than the 70-200,2.8VR, it is just that simple. I posted photos of what VR produces, and it is no advantage, not to me anyway.

Here we ****ing go again more bullshit

Yup .... instead of locking the threads ... lock the poster ...

He has proved from his linked photos he doesn't know how to focus so blames the lens

Maybe the lack of IQ and nailing focus is from his camera body .. upgrade time.

To the D810 [emoji3]

 

[Braineack]

Maybe the lack of IQ and nailing focus is from his camera body .. upgrade time.

he's using Nikon's highest pixel density camera ever developed. So that can't be it.

actually the shots taken with his D90 look SIGNIFICANTLY better in terms of IQ over the ones using the D7100.

edit: n/m, looks like that lens just sucks at 200mm and i see you're just cropping in heavily, just showing off imperfections (although I really do think it has an issue at 200mm looking at all the images).

at 80mm this shot looks great: 13391957875_7f859c82a0_o

at 200mm the same looks like trash 13392326644_b2311d2624_o

cropped in it looks awful: 21924016686_b2e66dc75a_o

I honestly think your 80-200 looks bad at 200mm. I think you need to send it into Nikon for an adjustment I bet the glass is off spec.

 

[astroNikon]

Maybe the lack of IQ and nailing focus is from his camera body .. upgrade time.

he's using Nikon's highest pixel density camera ever developed. So that can't be it.

The d5500 ?


I think I'll excuse myself from this thread now ...

 

[480sparky]

The camera and lens are supposed to do the focusing, but my focus is fine, as long as no VR is used on action. Most Viewed Try and get this with a VR lock..... 13857794494_a2450a2b92_o The photographer has to make decisions that no fuzzy logic software can.....

But what about using a girdle spurving? Have you tried that? Also, you can employ a lens made of prefabricated emulite. Just make sure you get one with the 7th semi-boloid slot. The older models with only 6 don't have operational novoltrunnions.

 

[Auslese]

Maybe the lack of IQ and nailing focus is from his camera body .. upgrade time.

he's using Nikon's highest pixel density camera ever developed. So that can't be it.

actually the shots taken with his D90 look SIGNIFICANTLY better in terms of IQ over the ones using the D7100.


I honestly think your 80-200 looks bad at 200mm. I think you need to send it into Nikon for an adjustment I bet the glass is off spec.

edit: n/m i see youre just cropping in heavily, just showing off imperfections (although I really do think it has an issue at 200mm looking at all the images).

at 80mm this shot looks great: 13391957875_7f859c82a0_o

at 200mm the same looks like trash 13392326644_b2311d2624_o

cropped in it looks awful: 21924016686_b2e66dc75a_o

It does not look bad, they are both terrible. I am not sure about the distance, as I do not have a rangefinder, the distance might be closer to 500 yards. But the better zoom of the 400 paired with the VR is clearly not effective in producing a clearer image, even with double the optical zoom

 

[Braineack]

the 80-400 is not a "better zoom".

 

[480sparky]

It does not look bad, they are both terrible. I am not sure about the distance, as I do not have a rangefinder, the distance might be closer to 500 yards. But the better zoom of the 400 paired with the VR is useless as be.

How can you not know the distance? Don't you have a metapolar refractive pilfrometer? EVERYONE has one of those, even if they're a basic model with a panametric fan. I know they're expensive, but they're certainly better than a transcendental hopper dadoscopes used by surfing photographers of the 1960s.

Perhaps the 400 would work better in VR if forty-one manestically spaced grouting brushes were employed. Of course, Nikon uses unilateral phase detractors in their VR, while Canon uses nonreversible trem'e dingle arms.

 

[Auslese]

the 80-400 is not a "better zoom".

Absolutely true........................Finally

 

[Auslese]

It does not look bad, they are both terrible. I am not sure about the distance, as I do not have a rangefinder, the distance might be closer to 500 yards. But the better zoom of the 400 paired with the VR is useless as be.

How can you not know the distance? Don't you have a metapolar refractive pilfrometer? EVERYONE has one of those, even if they're a basic model with a panametric fan. I know they're expensive, but they're certainly better than a transcendental hopper dadoscopes used by surfing photographers of the 1960s.

Perhaps the 400 would work better in VR if forty-one manestically spaced grouting brushes were employed. Of course, Nikon uses unilateral phase detractors in their VR, while Canon uses nonreversible trem'e dingle arms.

The camera and lens are supposed to work at any distance, I did not expect clear images, the difficult situation was only used as test. I am going to take some photos now, see ya later

 

[480sparky]

The camera and lens are supposed to work at any distance,

And if frogs had pockets, they'd carry guns so they wouldn't have to be afraid of snakes.

I did not expect clear images,

Probably due to user error.

the difficult situation was only used as test.

Did you pass?

I am going to take some photos now,

I doubt it. You've never posted any of your own. In fact, I doubt you even own a camera.

see ya later

The later, the bettter!

 

[dannylightning]

Hand holding my 32000mm lens with vr seems to work great.

Sent from my XT1028 using Tapatalk

 

[SquarePeg]

It's annoying enough when you start your own ridiculous thread just so you can argue and amuse yourself but to hijack someone else's thread where they were looking for genuine advice is just rude.

Is there an ignore function on this forum? If so please someone send me the instructions.

 

[astroNikon]

Hand holding my 32000mm lens with vr seems to work great.

Sent from my XT1028 using Tapatalk

I'd love to have a 32,000mm lens.
instead, I'm stuck with this

The camera and lens are supposed to do the focusing, but my focus is fine, as long as no VR is used on action. Most Viewed Try and get this with a VR lock..... 13857794494_a2450a2b92_o The photographer has to make decisions that no fuzzy logic software can.....

BTW, the background rocks are in nice focus. The dog, not so much.
What focusing mode are you using ... hope you aren't letting the camera make the decisions.