Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8E FL ED VR vs VRII

[bildo]

I spent a fair bit of time trying to search around for a thread regarding this, but with so many similar names and letters thrown all over the place it was like a needle in a haystack - mods, please feel free to merge if necessary.

I've had my 70-200 VRII for about 4 years, it's been used more than any other lens I've owned and apart from the VR being a bit funky and the zoom ring not being as smooth as it should be, it's been a great lens. However, I'm thinking it may be the time to freshen up my gear a bit, and since it's used most and I'm getting a new D500 I figured I may replace it rather than get it repaired.

Now, I've of course seen the 2.8E FL ED VR (or whatever you want to call it) release, which seemed like a bit of an anti-climax due to pricing however it does seem to have some useful features, namely the closer focusing and the focal breathing fix.

It seems as though Panamoz stock the new one for £1965 and the VRII for £1485 which is still a fair chunk of money. I'd be willing to pay it if it's worthwhile, but part of me would still be happy to stick with the VRII for the sake of £500.

Has anyone got any personal recommendations having used both? Was it worth it for you?

 

[gramps]

My 80-200 f2.8 push/pull gives fantastic results on my D500, looking at the images I wouldn't know it wasn't my old 70-200 f2.8 VRII, personally I can't see anything beyond gimmick with the FL, it wouldn't get £2k of my money ... mind you I haven't used the FL so don't qualify with your criteria.

 

[sk66]

If the focus breathing is an issue for you it might be worth it, but the f/4 version doesn't have that issue either (as bad). The only real benefit to fluorite elements is weight savings, and I don't think it will make much difference in that lens.

 

[bildo]

My 80-200 f2.8 push/pull gives fantastic results on my D500, looking at the images I wouldn't know it wasn't my old 70-200 f2.8 VRII, personally I can't see anything beyond gimmick with the FL, it wouldn't get £2k of my money ... mind you I haven't used the FL so don't qualify with your criteria.

Reassuring you're getting such great results from the D500 at least, I never used the 80-200 to compare it to the VRII in all fairness, it was my first plunge into the deep end. I have to admit that I did feel it was gimmicky, and I'm not entirely sure whether the slightly closer focus and slightly faster is worth the £500! I think I'm half wondering if someone will prove me wrong, but I think it's very unlikely!

 

[bildo]

If the focus breathing is an issue for you it might be worth it, but the f/4 version doesn't have that issue either (as bad). The only real benefit to fluorite elements is weight savings, and I don't think it will make much difference in that lens.

Thanks for the reply. It's more the closer focus than the breathing in all fairness. I work a lot at night and the 2.8 is absolutely essential for me so I can't even consider the F4, despite having heard it's a great lens for the money. Not bothered about saving 100g with the weight of everything else to be honest!

 

[sk66]

Thanks for the reply. It's more the closer focus than the breathing in all fairness.

W/o the major focus breathing you won't have to get as close .
The VRI version also has much less focus breathing... the main advantage the VRII has over it is out at the edges which the D500 crops off. It might be the "best bargain" answer for you.

 

[bildo]

W/o the major focus breathing you won't have to get as close .
The VRI version also has much less focus breathing... the main advantage the VRII has over it is out at the edges which the D500 crops off. It might be the "best bargain" answer for you.

True, however I will still have a second body (D750) as I'm not quite prepared to leave full frame!

My main issue with buying a VRI would be that ideally I need to buy new since I work professionally and could do without any work needing to be done anytime soon, I've had to get things fixed and it's a pain in the a**e!

I really wish the VRII would've taken a bigger price drop with the release of the new one, I don't think it's changed at all in 4 years if I remember correctly!

 

[sk66]

I really wish the VRII would've taken a bigger price drop with the release of the new one, I don't think it's changed at all in 4 years if I remember correctly!

So you're keeping it and looking to add a second? You could probably buy two of the VRI for the price of the new FL. Buy used from a reputable shop, and even if it does go down you're not w/o a 70-200.

Personally, I almost never care about corners/edges much...

 

[snerkler]

Knowing what I paid for my 70-200mm f2.8 VRII (new U.K.) the new one is sillly money IMO. I've never noticed the focus breathing (although don't deny it's there and a bad flaw) and I'm not sure that with this lens 30cm closer focussing is really going to matter (ymmv). My main concern with the new lens is that they've swapped the focus and zoom rings around. I used a lens like this (think it was the Sigma 70-200) and having the rings that way round feels very awkward IMO.

 

[rob-nikon]

I really wish the VRII would've taken a bigger price drop with the release of the new one, I don't think it's changed at all in 4 years if I remember correctly!

It's actual increased in price since September if you look at camera price buster, although that's not to do with the release of the new one (though the high new price hasn't entice many to change). One thing we can be sure of is camera equipment is increasing in price not going down.