nikon 70-200 vr2 lens worth the money?

pinco000

pinco000

Messages
94
Edit My Images
No
hi guys, I would like to read your opinions with regards to the above lenses. I was going to buy them today, but read some reviews last night, that the lens are not a real 70-200 when focusing subjects within 1.4m. Its a hell lot of money, but Im willing to spend if it worth it. These would nicely combi e with my tokina11-16f2.8, nikon17-55 f2.8 on d7k.
I have read some good reviews about the 55-200 and also about the 70-300.
thanks for reading this
 
Fantastic lens - different class from 55-200 and 70-300
 
Last edited:
I really like my 70-300 and for the money I'd have no hesitation in recommending it. It's very sharp. However from the reviews I've read, by all accounts the 70-200 is superb even if it does cost substantially more. It can be coupled with a teleconverter to give added flexibility too. HTH
 
Last edited:
Don't know which 70-300mm you mean, but regardless, you are talking different class altogether. 70-200mm vr2 is a phenomenal lens in every way. The sharpness, contrast, focus speed and accuracy. All top notch. For weddings/gigs/darker situations, this lens is absolutely invaluable.The 2 downsides are cost and weight.

What's your use though? If you plan on shooting snap candids during daytime, the lower end lenses, especially 70-300mm vr will be a good choice. For the price, it is still contrasty, AF speed/accuracy are good, well built (yet weighs nothing next to 70-200mm), and it's pretty sharp. I still have mine for casual roaming lens for walks and daytime events, especially if it's a long day out. 70-200mm really is rather heavy to have around you all day when you aren't working, or photography isn't your main thing for the day.

I don't know anything about 55-200mm, but for similar price to 70-300mm, and same apertures, i can't see any benefit of this lens over the extra reach 70-300mm offers.

HTH.
 
pinco000 said:
hi guys, I would like to read your opinions with regards to the above lenses. I was going to buy them today, but read some reviews last night, that the lens are not a real 70-200 when focusing subjects within 1.4m. Its a hell lot of money, but Im willing to spend if it worth it. These would nicely combi e with my tokina11-16f2.8, nikon17-55 f2.8 on d7k.
I have read some good reviews about the 55-200 and also about the 70-300.
thanks for reading this
Click to expand...

at anything under 5mts its only actually 135mm and not 200mm, i got shot of mine because of this, not paying for a 200mm lens and only having 135mm.

Youve got a crop camera so save yourself some serious money and get the MKI version.
 
Last edited:
thanks for all the replies guys! Im happy to announce that I got the VR2 and I cant describe how sharp sharp sharp sharp the thing is. It is phenomenal to my 17-55 f2.8! It is the best I have ever owned and Im gonna give it a real tomorrow in the London ZOO ;) soo happy..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top