Reviews and Problems with Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II
Showing 1-10 of 500
I wish I bought one a long time ago
Stephen P. Dalsemer "spd", Amazon
3 October 2013
Summary: I shoot a lot of high school football games at night and have tried all the latest 70-200mm F/2.8 lenses. All of them are great when the light is good and the F stop is F/4 or higher. The real difference is the performance when the lenses are wide open at F/2.8 and you are shooting at 200mm in low light. There is no comparison between this lens and all the rest. This lens is simply amazing and all the stories you here about how good it is are true.
Summary: This lens belongs in the pantheon of all-time greatest lens, and perhaps photography gear, period. It's *that* good. I shoot with a D800, and previous to the 70-200mm, I mainly used Nikon's 14-24mm f/2.8 and 24-70mm f/2.8, doing about 50% video and 50% stills. I recently completely the Nikon triumvirate of stellar lenses with this lens.
Summary: I initially purchased the Tamron 70-200 for less than less than 1/2 the price, hoping to save some money. However, I returned it immediately because of the unreasonably slow focus. I bit the bullet and purchased this. When I initially received it, I was a bit worried about the size and weight of the lens. However, when I started taking pictures, I could tell even on my D800 screen, zoom in, that this lens is incredibly sharp!
Summary: Just received this lens this morning. Shooting hand-held instead of a tripod, mirror lockup and remote shutter release this lens is much better than the Sigma 70-200mm I got last week. I did use a tripod, mirror lockup and remote shutter release for the Sigma lens. Don't even think I will bother with a tripod for any further testing. Lens is sharp wide open at F/2.8 and at all F-stops edge sharpness is great. I just decide to suck it up and buy this lens.
Summary: Please check out my reviews of the 14-24mm and the 24-70mm lenses for context. I bought this lens after buying my dream lens (300mm, F2.8) and finding it was too heavy for an old guy like me...that was a sad day. However I checked out the 70-200mm VRII and found it better suited to my capabilities. Years ago this would not have been a discussion. Regardless I added a Nikon 1.4x teleconverter and a Nikon 2.0x teleconverter.
Summary: I've had this lens for about a year and have taken many shots with it. While I do agree that this lens is a little heavy, it's a minor detail to get great photos. The AF is very fast and performs well even in low light. I haven't used the VR very much so can't comment on that. This lens delivers every time and is worth every cent.
Summary: I have always been a prime lens only girl because I felt that having a fixed focal length lens forced me to "move my feet" and get more creative with my shots. Lately though I'd been feeling the need for a good portrait zoom lens since it's not always easy to move around as much to get a good shot at various crowded events/locations, etc. I had read so many great things about this lens that I was convinced to spend the money, which for me is quite pricy.
Summary: I waited a year to buy this lens. It's truly amazing and worth every penny. The real test will be a horse show this weekend and I KNOW it won't disappoint. I bought a Carry Speed FS sling strap to make it more manageable to carry. It's definitely heavy but so worth the photos I can get with it!
Summary: I have owned the f/2.8G ED VR for 5 years and loved the lens so much I have chosen to keep it even tho I purchased this newer version. I'm very happy with the clarity of my sports shots, even using it with a teleconverter by Nikon. The VR II really makes a difference! However, I'm a little disappointed by the mechanics of the zoom ring. Not as fluid as the 2.8 VR. All in all these lenses by Nikon never stop amazing me how well they work.