Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G VR I or VR II ???

[traylorc]

After reading the rave reviews regarding the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G I am seriously considering purchasing this lens to go along with my D90.

Obviously the VR I is cheaper than the VR II...and I have read that the VR II addresses some of the shortcomings of the VR I.

In your opinion, would it be worth spending the extra cash and getting the VR II? Or would I be satisfied with the VR I? I read all the time how it's worthwhile to invest in some good glass. And to be honest despite some of the shortcomings I have read about concerning VR I, the overall consensus is that it's a very good piece of glass.

Any advice would be appreciated.

 

[Eco]

I could be wrong but I think the issues that were corrected were issues with full frame cameras so that would not matter for you now since you don't have a full frame. I own a D90 and the VR1 and can't think of a single issue, complaint or thing I would like changed.......except maybe if it could open up to 1.4 instead of 2.8 (kidding).

 

[Derrel]

On a D90, the VR 1 model is more than adequate.

 

[shaunly]

I've shot with both on my D700 and did not notice much different between the two. If money was no issue, then go for the VRII, but for me, I'd get the VRI because it's about $500 cheaper.

 

[Montana]

I would buy VRII if you can afford it. I say buy the best you can buy the first time.

 

[djacobox372]

I would buy VRII if you can afford it. I say buy the best you can buy the first time.

The only problem I have with that logic is that for the nearly $500 price difference between the VR1 and VR2 he could afford to upgrade his body to a d7000, which would be "better" upgrade then opting for the VR2.

 

[traylorc]

I would buy VRII if you can afford it. I say buy the best you can buy the first time.

The only problem I have with that logic is that for the nearly $500 price difference between the VR1 and VR2 he could afford to upgrade his body to a d7000, which would be "better" upgrade then opting for the VR2.

Upgrading to the d7000 would be a possible option, although I was thinking my next upgrade would be to a full frame body.

Now that I'm thinking about it...the fact that I would like to upgrade to a full frame body may lead me to pick the VR II. After all doesn't the VR II perform better on full frames than the VR I?

 

[kundalini]

After all doesn't the VR II perform better on full frames than the VR I?

My VRI has performed flawlessly on my D80, D300 & D700. I have no intention to upgrade to the VRII.

 

[Montana]

I would buy VRII if you can afford it. I say buy the best you can buy the first time.

The only problem I have with that logic is that for the nearly $500 price difference between the VR1 and VR2 he could afford to upgrade his body to a d7000, which would be "better" upgrade then opting for the VR2.

I am not so sure I would upgrade from a D90 to d7000. I would skip to a D700 if upgrading bodies. When I bought lenses using my XTi, I bought the very best I could afford and hindsight has never been a problem. There is a 70-200 mkII out but when I purchased mine, there wasn't. So in my case, my current gear still works fine for me....but I do want the mkII. I am on my 4th body in 4 years, and haven't had to upgrade any of my glass going from XTi to 5DII to 1DmkIV. I would put more money into glass and save for a better body down the road. The D90 is still a fantastic piece of kit. IMHO