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

Product Information

HRI stands for High Refractive Index Lens. With a refractive index of more than 2.0, one HRI lens can offer effects equivalent to those obtained with several normal glass elements and can compensate for both field curvature and spherical aberrations. Therefore, HRI lenses achieve great optical performance in an even more compact body. If I already own the 70-200 2.8 mk1, do I really need to upgrade to the mk2? How much better is the mk1 versus the mk2?”

Anyway, I still had to do a bokeh test of this lens against the Nikon cream machine and the king of bokeh – Nikon 85mm f/1.4. Take a look at these image samples: Although I no longer have my old 70-200mm lens (I sold it at a higher price than what I paid for it 3 years ago) to compare with, I feel that the bokeh actually looks better on this lens than on its predecessor. I went through some of my archived images and I can say that the bokeh on the previous 70-200mm does look a little harsher, although I rarely shot the older lens wide open, due to softness at very large apertures between f/2.8 and f/4. Nikon's Nano-Crystal-Coat does a sterling job of minimising flare and ghosting and the lens performs well for a design comprised of so many elements. A lens constructed of 21 elements in 16 groups would normally be an absolute nightmare for this. With a strong light source placed just out of the image, some ghosting and loss of contrast is present, but not to anywhere near the extent of the previous model. Shooting straight at a strong light source is also surprisingly ghost-free, with only a small amount of blooming around the edges of the light source. Build quality is similar to the majority of Nikon lenses we have tested so far. Most exterior parts are made of plastic, but that doesn't stop the lens from feeling solid and substantial in the hand.

Color rendition

Just like I thought, the Nikon 70-200mm f/4G turned out to be one hell of a lens. And my lab tests using Imatest fully support this data – the lens outperforms its bigger brother in a number of ways: The very first question I respond with is, what do you use your 70-200 for? Because in the case of both Nikon and Canon, the mk1 versions are good enough for many different kinds of work, while others will indeed “demand” that you upgrade to the mk2. The Nikon 70-200mm lenses Lastly, Canon makes a pair of 70-200mm f/4’s, the IS version being almost as sweet as Nikon’s f/4 version. Similarly, the Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS is a top choice among landscape photographers who care more about sharpness and saving weight than they do about gaining f/2.8. Sony 70-200mm Lenses Still, the Nikon Z 70-200mm f/2.8 VR S is hardly the heaviest 70-200mm f/2.8 on the market; that dubious crown belongs to some older generation 70-200mm f/2.8 DSLR lenses. In fact, when the Nikon F-mount 70-200mm f/2.8E FL came out in 2016, we praised it for its relatively light weight compared to prior 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses. While standards have risen in recent years (partly Nikon’s own doing thanks to their excellent and lightweight Z lenses), the fact remains that the Z 70-200mm f/2.8’s weight is manageable and not unusually high for such a lens. NIKON Z 7 II + NIKKOR Z 70-200mm f/2.8 VR S @ 200mm, ISO 250, 1/1250, f/2.8

One of the main attractions of this lens is the versatile focal range that goes from moderate to close-up telephoto. Nikon says that the Z 70-200mm f/2.8’s VR works in tandem with IBIS for a total of 5.5 stops of stabilization. As usual, we found these claims to be a bit higher than we could measure in practice. At 70mm, I consistently got about 3.5 stops of stabilization compared to using the lens with VR turned off; at 200mm, that improved to about 4.5 stops of stabilization. These are good real-world numbers and match my expectations. i've got a brand new one for sale in the classifieds...unwanted mag prize, just arrived and never out of the box To say that a lens, which drops 40-70mm of reach in typical portrait/wedding/party type shooting "bothers" some people is a bit of an understatement. Then again, if you’re very concerned about sharpness and you actually don’t need f/2.8 that desperately, don’t hesitate to get the 70-200mm f/4 VR instead. If you’re a landscape photographer toting around a D800e, for example, the 70-200mm f/4 VR is definitely going to be a fantastic choice. Or if you shoot mostly in daylight or casual conditions and are simply looking for something robust and reliable, the DOF / bokeh of the 70-200mm f/4 is still fantastic and beautiful.

ADVERTISEMENT

The last few of these to leave the production line were updated to "D," as seen on their identity plates. Hmm...point taken, Sorry. The 18-55, 55-200, and 18-105 that are bundled with the consumer DX bodies are VR I, and are the least expensive zooms in Nikon's lineup. The 18-200, 16-85, 55-300, and 70-300 are VR II. What threw me off is that VR II started showing up on the metal-mount DX line BEFORE the 18-55, 55-200, and 18-105 came out - in the 16-85, 18-200, and 70-300.