Age old question: Nikon 70-200 VR1 vs VR II - really worth almost €1000 euro more?

Cagey75

Cagey75

Messages
16,777
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
I'm sure it's been asked dozens of times in the past. But I'm still not sure what the big difference really is. Anywhere I read, it's basically the VR II is much better than VR 1, in terms of stabilising. But they're pretty much optically the same besides. Anyone have experience with both? Did you upgrade to version II? and why? Were you blown away or was it more "meh, same thing, slightly steadier for stills"?

I really want a 70-200, I loved the old 80-200 but it lacked the VR ... and a tripod collar. Plus I sold it to fund my Fx jump. Now I'm hungry for a 70-200 - but do I go the extra for a brand new II, or find a decent VRI - because essentially it'll do the same job?

Thanks.
 
Anyone? a simple yay or nay to going for the new version?
 
In the end i went for the VR-1 s/h,the VR-11 was just out of my price range,very pleased with it and the VR still very good :)
 
I went for the VR1 as well though it was mainly a cost based decision. IQ seems to be pretty similar for both. Where the VR1 suffers a bit is that it will vignette quite heavily at 2.8 on a full frame camera. It's not too difficult to correct but it is something to factor in.

A mate has the VR2 and we shot a wedding together a few weeks ago so had the chance to compare the two. The VR on the VR2 is a lot better, though the VR1 system is still very good. To my mind the VR1 looks and feels more expensive, somehow less plasticy, not sure if that is just an illusion.

They're both pretty damn fine, I don't think you'll be very upset with either purchase.
 
Cheers. I see a few VR1 models going in classifieds. I'll have to think hard on this one. The resale value will obviously be much better on the VRII, but then, would I ever be selling? Doubtful.

I get you on the focus breating issue, the 105mm micro does it too, when focusing in close. What you're framing, isn't always what you get once it's clearly in focus ... or something. Hard one to explain regarding a fixed focal length lens. But it happens. Can be very annoying.

[edit]Further reading on both, it seems the new version is better for sharpness, bokeh, and produces less CA - these could be enough to sway me to spend more.

First world problems eh ...
 
Last edited:
I had both VRI and VRII and if I had to choose then I would choose the VRI for the reason Gary stated.

As for selling it a very big NO!. I was bed/housebound for 5 months due to my severe back problems and decided I wouldn't be able to carry on as club photographer for Southend RFC, so I sold all my gear as I hadn't used it for around 7-8 months, 2 x Nikon D300s, 1 x 70-200 2.8 VRII and my Sigma 150-500.

Now I am getting back into it again I am buying it back again. All my latest gear is 2nd hand D300, D90 and 70-200 2.8 from MPB.

So what ever you DON"T sell your gear :LOL:, put it in its box and stick it in the loft.
 
I hear you on the back issue. I had major surgery on mine 5 years ago and it's never been the same. That's what pushed me more into the photography really. I couldn't work, and was getting depressed not doing anything constructive. Getting out and about when I could with a camera was a life saver. It was my therapy :) And still is to this day.

When I talk about selling, I mean selling one model to buy another. Let's say the upcoming Tamron 70-200 turns out to be a cracker, I may think on selling the older 70-200 to buy it. But I doubt I'd ever sell the VRII as I'm highly doubting any third party lens will rate so highly. The only time you'll sell that is for a newer Nikon version. Whenever that may be.
 
I've got the VR1 and I've shot over 8000 frames with VR2

Wouldn't consider changing to VR2,for what I shoot, equestrian, vignetting is no big deal for me. In the real world the only advantage over VR1 is slightly quicker focusing.

VR1 build, sharpness, colour, contrast all excellent. Still very fast to focus, works well with the mark3 x2 extender.
 
Thom Hogan has written a comprehensive review highlighting upon the focus breathing at minimum distance with images to back up exactly what the difference is. for most people its a non issue plus it mentions across the frame sharpness improvements which on FF may be more of a deal maker than a breaker

take a peep - http://www.bythom.com/nikkor-70-200-VR-II-lens.htm
 
Just to throw a spanner in the works here, I had a flick through advanced photographer magazine in Sainsburys earlier and it has a review of the current crop of 70-200's. From memory the Tamron scored 82/100, the Nikon VR2 93/100, the Canon IS II 95/100 and drum roll... The Sigma 70-200 OS scored 96/100. I've not personally used the OS version of the Sigma but maybe worth further investigation.
 
gad-westy said:
Just to throw a spanner in the works here, I had a flick through advanced photographer magazine in Sainsburys earlier and it has a review of the current crop of 70-200's. From memory the Tamron scored 82/100, the Nikon VR2 93/100, the Canon IS II 95/100 and drum roll... The Sigma 70-200 OS scored 96/100. I've not personally used the OS version of the Sigma but maybe worth further investigation.
Click to expand...

My personal weapon of choice.

The o.p doesn't like Sigma glass though.
 
Im selling my VR and getting the Sigma
 
gad-westy said:
Just to throw a spanner in the works here, I had a flick through advanced photographer magazine in Sainsburys earlier and it has a review of the current crop of 70-200's. From memory the Tamron scored 82/100, the Nikon VR2 93/100, the Canon IS II 95/100 and drum roll... The Sigma 70-200 OS scored 96/100. I've not personally used the OS version of the Sigma but maybe worth further investigation.
Click to expand...

Is that based purely on technical/performance issues or is price taken into account in the rating. If the latter Id be more than happy to stay with my Nikkor 70-200 mk1.
 
Simplythebeast said:
Is that based purely on technical/performance issues or is price taken into account in the rating. If the latter Id be more than happy to stay with my Nikkor 70-200 mk1.
Click to expand...

my thoughts exactly. just seeing the score totals with no indication on how those numbers were achieved makes them a tad redundant.

i'd guess it was the perceived better value from the lower price that gave the extra points :shrug:
 
Tirpitz said:
my thoughts exactly. just seeing the score totals with no indication on how those numbers were achieved makes them a tad redundant.

i'd guess it was the perceived better value from the lower price that gave the extra points :shrug:
Click to expand...

You'd have to read it I'm afraid. Only flicked through it in the shop. From memory though the sigma scored evenly on performance and I'm sure value was also factored in.
 
i've heard from a few different places that they are closing the gap with the newer models so its probably never been such a good time to buy (y)
 
Soda Farl said:
My personal weapon of choice.

The o.p doesn't like Sigma glass though.
Click to expand...


To date yeah. I just had a few bad experiences with their lenses, across 3 different bodies. From their older 70-300 to the older version of the 70-200, the HSM II - which I bought brand new. I wasn't happy with it.

I'll look up some reviews on the newer OS version. I'm open to giving them a chance. If it's a total re-haul rather than an update I might try one for the money. I did make a bid on a VR1 70-200 on here, but I was beaten to it.
 
I have the OS Sigma 70-200, and its simply fantastic :0) Can't fault it...but them I've never owned either of the Nikon versions.
 
You can get a used VR II for £1200 to £1250. If I shot DX I'd get a VR I, on FX I'd get the VR II.
 
The one on here went for £900 :( I just missed out on it. I can get the Sigma OS version new for that price. Anyone else use it?
 
Cagey75 said:
The one on here went for £900 :( I just missed out on it. I can get the Sigma OS version new for that price. Anyone else use it?
Click to expand...

You can get it much cheaper from panamoz
 
I'm still wary of ordering from there. I fear I'll be hit by customs, even though the site do say they include import charges in their prices. Irish customs are pretty ruthless, wouldn't put it past them to still add their own charges on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top