NikonJin - the 100% free Nikon Forums

AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II

Specifications

Focal length 70-200mm
Maximum aperture f/2.8
Minimum aperture f/22
Lens construction 21 elements in 16 groups (with 7 ED and some Nano Crystal Coat-deposited lens elements)
Picture angle 34°20’ - 12°20’ (22°50’ - 8° with Nikon DX format)
Closest focus distance 1.4 m/4.6 ft. (throughout entire zoom range)
Maximum reproduction ratio 0.12x
No. of diaphragm blades 9 (rounded)
Filter/attachment size 77mm
Diameter x length(extension from lens mount) Approximately 87 x 205.5 mm/3.4 x 8.1 in.
Weight Approximately 1,540 g/3.4 lb.
Supplied accessories 77mm Snap-on Front Lens Cap LC-77, Rear Lens Cap LF-1, Bayonet Hood HB-48, Semi-soft case CL-M2

Discuss and post your samples here

DPReview's review:

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/niko..._vrii_n15/

Photozone's 70-200mm VR2 review is out:
http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/511-nik...20028vr2ff


the comparison between 70-200VR and 70-200VRII:

Distortions
70-200 VR - (70mm)1.27% (135mm)0.95% (200mm)1.74%
70-200 VRII - (70mm)0.59% (135mm)0.97% (200mm)1.41%

Vignetting
70-200 VR- (F2.8) 0.95 1.51 1.52 / (F4) 0.40 0.87 0.82
70-200 VRII - (F2.8) 0.66 0.79 0.93 / (F4) 0.42 0.55 0.76

CAs
70-200 VR- (F2.8) 1.44 0.83 0.57 / (F4) 1.31 0.73 0.58
70-200 VRII - (F2.8) 1.00 1.23 1.39 / (F4) 0.85 1.34 1.20


Resolution

I am surprised the VR1 has higher resolution figures at 70 and 135 mm at F2.8.

I am happy with my 70-200, no reason to upgrade to the VR2. I can't justify the price difference.

Looks like the VR2 is better at longer end
VR1 is better at the wider end.

get the VRII... it's a lovely lens. the reason to get it is if you shoot at 200 most of the time and also need to use the VR.