Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 G IF-ED VR

Dangermouse

Dangermouse

Squeaky Clean
Messages
9,968
Edit My Images
No
I am nearing the point where I can buy one of these lens and have found a new one in an ebay shop for £1249 with free pnp from HK als0 I have found another for £100 more but this one is in the UK.
I have bought less expensive items from HK but do I trust nearly £1300 going overseas or do I help the economy here when the time comes and its close now

By the way these are both the white versions not black:love:
 
Personally speaking, I'd buy in the UK. The usual warranties will apply, if there's issues you can phone the shop directly and the will speak English.

Good luck with the purchase, it's a lens I'd love to add to my collection.
 
Why not wait until the new version gets released?....there's bound to be a load of these coming up as people 'upgrade'.
 
I bought mine from HK and it hasn't missed a beat.

I bought mine from digital rev if I remember rightly, on one of their claim the tax back auctions.
 
sdb123 said:
Why not wait until the new version gets released?....there's bound to be a load of these coming up as people 'upgrade'.
Click to expand...

I thought the VRII was already out sure DPReview has done the review already unless it was a pre release one
 
The price of the new 70-200 VR is scandalous IMHO.

Not sure Nikon lenses are that much better than the Canon's versions to justify a £700 premium over the Canon version, and a £400 premuim over the older version....
 
puddleduck said:
The price of the new 70-200 VR is scandalous IMHO.

Not sure Nikon lenses are that much better than the Canon's versions to justify a £700 premium over the Canon version, and a £400 premuim over the older version....
Click to expand...

The quoted £2k will be the list price, not street, iirc the current one has a list price of £1800.....
 
puddleduck said:
The price of the new 70-200 VR is scandalous IMHO.

Not sure Nikon lenses are that much better than the Canon's versions to justify a £700 premium over the Canon version, and a £400 premuim over the older version....
Click to expand...

You do have to wonder about the pricing strategy...
 
I may be wrong about this but the outgoing 70 - 200 f2.8 always had the second incarnation of VR hence the VR11 which is confusing.
 
puddleduck said:
The price of the new 70-200 VR is scandalous IMHO.

Not sure Nikon lenses are that much better than the Canon's versions to justify a £700 premium over the Canon version, and a £400 premuim over the older version....
Click to expand...

I agree totally Andy.

I cannot work out how the 70-200 is worth so much more than the 80-200,God knows how they work the latest price for version 2.

I firmly believe they are taking the pee.
 
miurasv said:
I may be wrong about this but the outgoing 70 - 200 f2.8 always had the second incarnation of VR hence the VR11 which is confusing.
Click to expand...

No, it had the first version. VRII was introduced in 2005 on the 18-200 VR.
 
Dangermouse1964 said:
just realised it was a pre release one KR got hold of link above(y)
Click to expand...


I think you'll find Uncle Ken is looking at pictures of the lens and commenting on them.

He says "I can't see any focus lock buttons" rather than "There aren't any focus lock butotns".

The Usual Ken Rockwell look at a picture then become the expert on it :bang::bang::bang:
 
miurasv said:
I may be wrong about this but the outgoing 70 - 200 f2.8 always had the second incarnation of VR hence the VR11 which is confusing.
Click to expand...

Actually, I am wrong. Just had a look at Ken Rockwell's review and the new one is VR11.
 
barneyrubble said:
I think you'll find Uncle Ken is looking at pictures of the lens and commenting on them.

He says "I can't see any focus lock buttons" rather than "There aren't any focus lock butotns".

The Usual Ken Rockwell look at a picture then become the expert on it :bang::bang::bang:
Click to expand...

I wonder if he'll find it good for portraits, or will the 18-200 still be Nikon's best for that, in his wee world :wacky:
 
I agree with sdb123 the market will get flooded with these by those with N.A.S when the the new one is released hang fore for the bargains!
 
He goes on to say he would rather have the 70-300 VR or the 85 1.8.

Each to his own.

Amazing how someone can become such an expert from just a picture of a lens :D:D:D
 
fracster said:
I agree totally Andy.

I cannot work out how the 70-200 is worth so much more than the 80-200,God knows how they work the latest price for version 2.

I firmly believe they are taking the pee.
Click to expand...


I've said it before and I' say it again, the 80-200 is the "bargain" of the Nikon range (y)
 
oskanoears said:
I agree with sdb123 the market will get flooded with these by those with N.A.S when the the new one is released hang fore for the bargains!
Click to expand...

Well, I have a serious case of NAS. Always have and always will. However, you will have to prise my 70-200 out of my cold lifeless hands. I will NOT be getting the new one at that price (unless i won the lottery last night, in which case I'll buy you all one :D:D)
 
You can still find them new if you look really hard. Secondhand is better. The AF-S version is the one you want (or at least the one i would want)
 
Is it that the 80-200 hasnt got VR why its much cheaper or does it have VR now
 
barneyrubble said:
Well, I have a serious case of NAS. Always have and always will. However, you will have to prise my 70-200 out of my cold lifeless hands. I will NOT be getting the new one at that price (unless i won the lottery last night, in which case I'll buy you all one :D:D)
Click to expand...

Barney, I heard you won £6.70 on the euro millions last night so can i have my lens please:D

I to will wait for the multitude of S/H ones to appear on here:)
 
Dangermouse1964 said:
Is it that the 80-200 hasnt got VR why its much cheaper or does it have VR now
Click to expand...

The 80-200mm has never had VR. It's cheaper because the 70-300mm came out. Optically there's not much if anything in it (I've owned the 80-200mm AF-D and hired the 70-200mm).
 
miurasv said:
Is the 80 - 200 f2.8 still being made as my local camera shop told me it's been discontinued?
Click to expand...

I think it's stilll being made, but not many uk retailers stock it

barneyrubble said:
You can still find them new if you look really hard. Secondhand is better. The AF-S version is the one you want (or at least the one i would want)
Click to expand...

When I was looking for one, the difference between a secondhand 80-200 AF-S and a secondhand 70-200 was only £100, which didn't make it a terribly good buy.

Dangermouse1964 said:
Is it that the 80-200 hasnt got VR why its much cheaper or does it have VR now
Click to expand...

No VR and no AF-S
 
sdb123 said:
The 80-200mm has never had VR. It's cheaper because the 70-300mm came out. Optically there's not much if anything in it (I've owned the 80-200mm AF-D and hired the 70-200mm).
Click to expand...



Are you saying there's not much in it optically between the above 3 lenses? If so the 70 - 300 VR is a bargain.
 
miurasv said:
Are you saying there's not much in it optically between the above 3 lenses? If so the 70 - 300 VR is a bargain.
Click to expand...

The 80-200 is vastly superior to the 70-300 VR in terms of optics. I couldn't believe the difference when I traded up. At £500 or so nowadays the 70-300 is anything but a bargain....
 
Sorry. Just re read your post and you mean there's not much in it between the 70 - 200 VR 2.8 and 80 - 200 2.8?
 
Flash In The Pan said:
The 80-200 is vastly superior to the 70-300 VR in terms of optics. I couldn't believe the difference when I traded up. At £500 or so nowadays the 70-300 is anything but a bargain....
Click to expand...

That was a typo by me. :bonk:

There have been 2nd hand 70-300mm VR's for under £300 on here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top