I tested it (actually in controlled conditions to be sure) and found it to be noticeably less sharp than the 70-200 VRII, even at f/2.8. I decided to return the lens after that. The store accepted my test results as evidence for the return by the way. It could be that my 70-200 VRII was exceptionally good, or my 200/2 was exceptionally bad. Just posted! Our new lens review of Nikon's top-end fast telezoom, the AF-S VR-Nikkor 70-200mm F2.8G ED-IF. This is the first in a series of reviews in which we'll be comparing it with similar lenses from Canon, Sigma and Tamron, using both APS-C and 35mm full frame cameras. Nikon Nikkor Z 70-180mm F2.8 Nikon Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 VR S Nikon Nikkor Z 800mm F6.3 VR S Nikon Nikkor Z 85mm F1.2 S Nikon Nikkor Z 85mm F1.8 S Nikon Nikkor Z DX 12-28mm F3.5-5.6 PZ VR Nikon Nikkor Z DX 16-50mm F3.5-6.3 VR

NIKON Z 5 + NIKKOR Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR @ 200mm, ISO 200, 1/40, f/8.0. The next page of this review dives into the 24-200mm f/4-6.3’s construction and real-world use in more detail. So, click below to go to the next chapter, “Build quality and handling.” Build Quality and Construction. The Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR is not a heavy-duty

If money is no object: 70-200mm VR 2 f2.8. If money is object but FX: 70-200mm VR F4. If Dx camera: 70-200mm VR 1 f2.8. I could go in very long technical reasons why, but that might bore you. I thought the older VR1 70-200 could not auto focus on a DX camera like the 5200.
Based on how well it worked on the 400mm f/2.8E FL, I would assume we would see similar performance improvements on the 800mm f/5.6E FL and any future Nikkor super telephoto lenses. Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II. The performance in sharpness between the new TC-14E III and TC-14E II is practically non-existent.
Other than the slight softness and rather high CA from 200-300mm though, the performance of the 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 ED-IF AF-S VR Zoom Nikkor (yeesh, that's a mouthful) was really excellent. And
Tamron's new 70-200/2.8 zoom is a very competent lens: It's almost up there with the best Nikon has to offer, even sometimes surpassing the new Nikon 70-200/2.8E VR in image quality. It offers a very effective image stabilization of almost 5 stops even if it could not suppress the mirror-slap of the D810 completely and has a fast and reliable AF.
In fact, if you look at Photozone's testing of the 80-400 VR compared to the 70-200 f2.8 VRI (not VRII) + 2x TCII (not TCIII), and you will see that the 70-200 + TC combo stands up very well to the 80-400. However, the 70-200 f2.8 VRII + 2x TCIII is a better combo and the results would be better again than the 80-400.
Nikon Z 70-200mm f/2.8 VR S Review. By Nasim Mansurov 60 Comments ISO 64, 1/15, f/5.6 NIKON Z 7 II + NIKKOR Z 70-200mm f/2.8 VR S @ 70mm, ISO 64, 1/5,
\n nikon 70 200 f2 8 vr review
Nikon Z7 II Sony a7R V Sony 70-200mm F2.8 G SSM II Sony FE 200-600 F5.6-6.3 Nikon Z 14-24mm F2.8 +5 more Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain
As promised, Nikon has updated the legacy F mount 70-200mm to include support for users of the Z mount system with the new NIKKOR Z 70-200mm f/2.8 VR S lens. While the Nikon Z 70-200mm f/2.8 VR S is not cheap, it is an exceptional lens, and like most things Nikon by next year, you should find this lens available at a lower cost.
- two lens set: 70-200 mm f/2.8 + 200 -500 mm f/5.6 1.4kg + 2.3kg lenses. Both can be shot wide open also at the long end with no regret. - tamron or sigma 150-200 f/6.3 at the long end 2 kg or more depending on model. To cover the short tele range probably again the 70-200 f/2.8 on the FX camera.
But reviews like this one of the Z 70-200 f/2.8 VR S are making it difficult to resist getting into the Z equipment. " The Nikon Z 70-200mm f/2.8 VR S is the
IucAEm7.
  • vva1m6mtxr.pages.dev/245
  • vva1m6mtxr.pages.dev/410
  • vva1m6mtxr.pages.dev/326
  • vva1m6mtxr.pages.dev/291
  • vva1m6mtxr.pages.dev/389
  • vva1m6mtxr.pages.dev/450
  • vva1m6mtxr.pages.dev/365
  • vva1m6mtxr.pages.dev/6

    • nikon 70 200 f2 8 vr review