Anybody using the Nikon 200/2?

JonathanRyan

JonathanRyan

Messages
10,765
Name
Jonathan
Edit My Images
Yes
How do you find it? Ridiculously heavy? Magically sharper than 70-200?

Do you find you use it enough to justify the cost?

It's my latest gear crush....
 
I have one, it really is magically sharper, at any aperature, fairly heavy but not crazy, best used on a monopod or something though.

Bokeh is amazing. I don't use mine very often but when I do I'm very happy that I own it!
 
Cool - presumably that's the cheap one? Not the brand new monster?

Got any pics....?
 
Used it for a wedding last year. It cured my lust for this lens.

It's good, but ferociously pricey and very heavy. Big and obvious.

Considering you can have a 70-200 VR2 and the new 85G for the same money as the old one it's a tough sell IMO. The new one at £4200 is just mad.

Oh, and I didn't find it any sharper than the really very excellent 70-200VR2.
 
FWIW, I regularly go here (Link ...) just to look at examples of photos from this (amazing) lens :).

I was at a photographic seminar hosted by Joe McNally last year. For most of it, he was using a Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II (with satisfactory results). Then he switched to the 200mm f/2 VR. Talk about night and day :eek: - the 200mm lens revealed a lot more detail, especially in the shadow areas, which always came out as more or less black from the 70-200mm lens! And the bokeh ... let's not even go there :lol:!

I has a hell of a price tag, but when I see what it can do (in the right hands), it all makes sense to me :).
 
Well it wasn't exactly cheap but yeah not the VRII version

Few sample pics (I generally only shoot wildlife)

4545753646_a8b3287a58_o.jpg


4545078795_d376a5482e_o.jpg


There's also a 200 f2 group on flickr:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/785335@N22/pool/with/4545753646/
 
Last edited:
Radiohead said:
Used it for a wedding last year. It cured my lust for this lens.

It's good, but ferociously pricey and very heavy. Big and obvious.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's my worry.

Hairyduck said:
Well it wasn't exactly cheap but yeah not the VRII version
Click to expand...

Yeah but have you seen the cost of the pixie dust version? Makes all my glass look cheap ;) Nice pics :)

ETA: just checked your Flickr - what did you shoot the Reed Buntings with? Female one is lovely.
 
Last edited:
If you're buying it for weddings I'd have a really good think about it before buying. It's not one I'd use. Not sure what you have at the moment though? The new one - hell, you could have a 24G, 35G and 85G with change! For portraits it makes a bit more sense but still massively pricey for any difference you'd see compared to a 70-200VR2.
 
Radiohead said:
If you're buying it for weddings I'd have a really good think about it before buying. It's not one I'd use. Not sure what you have at the moment though?
Click to expand...

Yeah portraiture and fashion. But since weddings pay more of the money there's no way I'd be able to resist dragging it along.

ATM I have the Mk I 70-200 which looks like it's been dropped down a flight of steps. Because....... :)

I've been offered a pre loved v1 (the non pixie dust edition). It's not cheap - but I could trade a couple of things I don't use enough and do a quick midweek shoot and burn wedding to cover it..........:lol:
 
I considered the 200mm f/2 VR I second hand for about £2,300, but in the end I went for a 70-200mm VR II and a 135mm f/2 DC. I just couldn't think of enough situations where 200mm fixed would come in that useful for me.
 
u2u ryanboy on here, he used to use his all the time for weddings until I bought it off him ;) I think he's bought another one now to replace it, I'm sure he can show you some very nice wedding stuff shot on it
 
JonathanRyan said:
Yeah portraiture and fashion. But since weddings pay more of the money there's no way I'd be able to resist dragging it along.

ATM I have the Mk I 70-200 which looks like it's been dropped down a flight of steps. Because....... :)

I've been offered a pre loved v1 (the non pixie dust edition). It's not cheap - but I could trade a couple of things I don't use enough and do a quick midweek shoot and burn wedding to cover it..........:lol:
Click to expand...

The 70-200VR2 is a big improvement over the Mk1. But then I shoot most of my stuff wide anyway, so a 200mm prime doesn't really appeal.
 
but I could trade a couple of things I don't use enough and do a quick midweek shoot and burn wedding to cover it..........:lol:
Click to expand...

I like the way you think lol

Do it!

My ultimate lust lens. I want one!
 
JonathanRyan said:
Yeah but you're only saying that so you can nip over the bridge and borrow it.
Click to expand...

:D

I'm debating my next purchases at the moment, more lights first, then my lens fetish will get some attention! lol. 85mm 1.4 or 135mm DC all the way to the bank..hooraaaa!!
 
Did I hear my name :D

I did indeed have the 200/2 before selling it to Kevin.

To say I used it a lot at weddings is a slight exageration :) I used it for shots of the bride and groom at the altar a couple of times and for some candids. While I owned the 200/2 I also bought the 70-200 vr II.

My thoughts:-

1). The sharpness of the f2.8 vr ii was much improved on the original. So much so that I wasn't seeing a significant difference over the 200/2.

2). The weight of the 200/2 was too much for a wedding. Getting it into position for the right shot at the right time was harder than it needed to be.

I decided that the 200/2 was a fantastic lens for model portraits and the like where there is time to set up the shot and put the lens down when needed. It was not ideal for fast paced shooting like weddings where the camera needs to be in hand constantly. And due to the weight of the lens I wouldn't want to leave it over one shoulder while shooting with s different lens/body due to the risk of damage to the lens mount.

If money was no object I would buy another 200/2 tomorrow. But not to use at weddings. Only for the other types of portraiture I do.

For now the new 85/1.4 is doing fab things for me and the 70-200 is a cracking improvement over version 1.

Hope this helps :)
 
Last edited:
Thanks v much for that rundown.

It makes me more annoyed that I dropped my 70-200. Plan was to wait until VR II dropped a little in price then sell privately and upgrade for £3 - 400. Now not only would I feel bad about selling a dropped lens 2nd hand, it has a crack in the barrel (though amazingly works perfectly).

Sounds like the 200/2 would need a monopod, time and thought. And if I'm going to use those then I could just get a 2nd hand HC 300 for the 'blad :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top