Nikon 70-200mm 2.8E FL ED VR

you could just buy one and stop bothering other people...

Well no.. would make no sense for me to buy one. I already have the VRI, and it would just be silly for me to drop that kind of money on a lens that would only give me slightly better results than what I already have in most of the shooting situations I encounter.

However, I was just saying if we are going to start some sort of protest movement to prevent professionals from purchasing them, by all means, sign me up. I'd be more than happy to make sure one of these doesn't get purchased by a pro provided they send me one for free.

What can I say, I'm a giver.
 
you could just buy one and stop bothering other people...

Well no.. would make no sense for me to buy one. I already have the VRI, and it would just be silly for me to drop that kind of money on a lens that would only give me slightly better results than what I already have in most of the shooting situations I encounter.

However, I was just saying if we are going to start some sort of protest movement to prevent professionals from purchasing them, by all means, sign me up. I'd be more than happy to make sure one of these doesn't get purchased by a pro provided they send me one for free.

What can I say, I'm a giver.
Buy me one.
then you could bug me. :)
 
you could just buy one and stop bothering other people...

Well no.. would make no sense for me to buy one. I already have the VRI, and it would just be silly for me to drop that kind of money on a lens that would only give me slightly better results than what I already have in most of the shooting situations I encounter.

However, I was just saying if we are going to start some sort of protest movement to prevent professionals from purchasing them, by all means, sign me up. I'd be more than happy to make sure one of these doesn't get purchased by a pro provided they send me one for free.

What can I say, I'm a giver.
Buy me one.
then you could bug me. :)
Well it was braineacks idea, I was just trying to be supportive. So I guess he could buy you one. :)

Sent from my N9518 using Tapatalk
 
I think it is probably right up there with the $1500.00 58mm f1.4
 
i had not heard of this new nikon lens, but the b&h customer reviews are very supportive even for the price. i wonder if NPhoto mag has tested it yet.

I'll probably sell my 70-200VRII & get the sig 85 ART. that will leave my 105mm micro & monster sig150-600 Sport for longer shooting.

People often comment on the 70-200, but the amount of attention the Sport brings is ridiculous. at races no one says a thing, but carry it around town, and you may lose the ability to shoot candids. never mind the sun shield!
 
Last edited:
I have the VRII version. Good enough for me.Don't really need the electromagnetic aperture.
 
For the record, some voices on the net say that flourite lenses are soft and fragile, and that they also change a lot with temperature ... IMHO that doesnt go too well with the concept of a robust "workhorse" lens.

And I heard that those fluorite lens coatings (added to the front and back element so they're easier to clean) also have the issue that they're quite soft .. which if true kind of defeats the purpose.


You get all the new lens coatings: 6 ED, 1 Fluorite, 1 HRI element + Nano Crystal & Fluorine coatings VS. 7 ED + Nano Crystal
That in itself though means nothing at all.

The electromagnetic aperture surely costs $$$$ -- helps with exposure during bursts.
Hu ! So thats the advantage. And here I though the "E" lenses are just another step of cost saving, just like the "G" (no aperture ring) before.

it's already an expensive workhorse lens.
Agreed. But as a hobbyist I have the luxury that I can pick the 'magic', 'honeypot', 'dream' lenses instead of those boring "workhorse" ones. Prime lenses like for example my beloved Makro Planar 100mm (currently my personal favorite lens) or the AF 105mm f2 DC Zack Arias praised as one of the three "magic" lenses he knows about.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top