Nikon 70-200mm 2.8VR

[April]

I'm getting a pretty decent income tax refund back, and I'm looking into getting a lens. I had considered getting a flash, but I'm hoping to concentrate more on outdoor portrait stuff. Can anyone give me the good, the bad and the ugly on this lens? Will I have to sell my first born? Would refurbished be an okay way to go? I'm using the D40x. Thanks in advance.

[yert3]

April,
You will love the lens! I've had mine for about 2 years now. Let me tell you how I came across it: I often review a number of websites looking at photographs, and I was immediately attracted to a number of photos from different photographers. It wasn't necessarily the compositions of the photos, but rather the quality, the contrast, the colors, bokah, and the ability to isolate the subject from the background. I then discovered they were all taken with the same lens...the Nikkor 20 -200 mm VR. Eventually I broke down and bought one...and I have no regrets. I was shooting with a Nikon D70 at the time, which is a fine camera, but that one lens immediately showed me what that camera was capable of! The only negative that I've heard is the size and weight. I agree, it can be a beast at times, especially at the end of the day after having it strapped around your neck throughout it all, BUT....the quality of pictures that lens creates is worth it.

Yert3

[Max@Home]

Originally Posted by April

I'm getting a pretty decent income tax refund back, and I'm looking into getting a lens. I had considered getting a flash, but I'm hoping to concentrate more on outdoor portrait stuff. Can anyone give me the good, the bad and the ugly on this lens? Will I have to sell my first born? Would refurbished be an okay way to go? I'm using the D40x. Thanks in advance.

Hi April!

...so little for your firstborn ?

$1550 - $1650 is cheap in €urop€an eyes with that low Dollar ...

...at least: for what you get: the good is, that it is pretty good, the bad is, that you will want more-of-that quality (called L-fever 'on the other side', maybe called ED-rash overhere ? )

And the ugly is that they *all* cost and weigh much

If 'refurbished' would mean 'refurbished by Nikon' with official warranty, *I* would have no reserves to buy one, especially since they also come in Grey-ish white but they rather do not fit my bodies...

...and it may look like 'overkill' on a 'mere' D40x, but let them laugh, your image quality will speak for itself

...best of luck finding one , I hear they are scarce...

Kindest regards!

Max@Home

[cyclohexane]

There's a reason this lens is found in pretty much every photojournalist and event photographer's bag. It covers a very useful range, and you can shoot much, much more with it than just outdoor portraits.

The one knock against it that I have is the minimum focusing distance of 5 feet. Invariably you'll find instances when you want to be shooting something just inside 5 feet with this lens, and you're hosed.

The only negative that I've heard is the size and weight. I agree, it can be a beast at times, especially at the end of the day after having it strapped around your neck throughout it all

Ever schlepped a 400mm f/2.8 or 600mm f/4? Everything is light after that, comparatively. =)

Besides, you shouldn't be wearing your camera around your neck. It's bad for your back.

[JeRon]

Kindly check though, if the 70-200 VR would auto focus on D40x. I heard, this DSLR has limitations on some lenses.

[cyclohexane]

It will AF; it's got the Silent Wave Motor (SWM). We've used a D40 with the 70-200, and it works fine. The D40X is essentially the same body.

[Nikonfreak]

I agree with Michael.

This lens is in EVERY photojournalist and event photographer's bag. Bar none. It's always there. It's a staple. It's the meat and potatoes lens. This lens is usually on a body at EVERYTHING I shoot. PERIOD.

That said, it's excellent. There's not a bad thing that can be said about this lens on a DX body.

It's not that big and it's not that heavy. There were guys at the wildlife refuge this weekend lugging around full sized tripods and 600mm f/4 lenses. THAT'S BIG AND HEAVY!

Julio

[Nikonfreak]

Originally Posted by JeRon

Kindly check though, if the 70-200 VR would auto focus on D40x. I heard, this DSLR has limitations on some lenses.

As Michael said, yes it will.

Any lens in the Nikon lineup that has "AF-S" has the silent wave focusing motor in it and will autofocus with the D40 or D40x or D60.

Julio

[stacy]

I have the 70-200 vr 2.8 and love it however I also have the 80-400 and love it more for outdoor photo's unless shooting sports they cost about the same and are both great lenses.

[DavidGregg]

Originally Posted by April

I'm getting a pretty decent income tax refund back, and I'm looking into getting a lens. I had considered getting a flash, but I'm hoping to concentrate more on outdoor portrait stuff. Can anyone give me the good, the bad and the ugly on this lens? Will I have to sell my first born? Would refurbished be an okay way to go? I'm using the D40x. Thanks in advance.

Buy it! You will love it. It's build, quality, AF, feel will all then become your 'standard' requirements for future lenses.

[gaopa2]

My Nikkor 70-200/2.8 VR is my favorite lens and I have now collected some nice Nikon glass.... buy it, you will really like it. I have never used the D40X, but have used my lens on a D200 and now a D300. I have used it a lot this past week shooting the Tour de Georgia bicycle race. The images are tack sharp! Cheers, Bill P.

[April]

Thanks for all those responses! Now I just have to research where to purchase. I didn't realize how big it was, I hadn't actually seen it till now. I did a bit of research on it but it doesn't compare to actually getting opinions from people who've used it. And auto focus, that's great! I'm excited after hearing so many great reviews!

[Songman45]

The 70-200 2.8 is a power house lens, no doubt. If you buy it, you'll be happy and you'll use it. If you can live without 10mm of focal length and the VR, the 80-200 2.8 is pretty awesome, a little lighter and somewhat less expensive.

[cannockwolf]

Originally Posted by Songman45

The 70-200 2.8 is a power house lens, no doubt. If you buy it, you'll be happy and you'll use it. If you can live without 10mm of focal length and the VR, the 80-200 2.8 is pretty awesome, a little lighter and somewhat less expensive.

Sorry to hijack but I too am looking at either the 80-200mm AF-D and the 70-200mm AF-S, and was interested whether there is double the difference in the quality of image as there is in the price, I would presume the quality would be the same and it is just the AF and VR that would make any differences, but in the UK we are talking £500 extra!, and is AF-S and VR worth that much cash?

I would appreciate any thoughts and love to see some photographs taken with the 80-200mm as you can find 70-200mm examples everywhere LOL

thanks, Dave

[Songman45]

Originally Posted by cannockwolf

Sorry to hijack but I too am looking at either the 80-200mm AF-D and the 70-200mm AF-S, and was interested whether there is double the difference in the quality of image as there is in the price, I would presume the quality would be the same and it is just the AF and VR that would make any differences, but in the UK we are talking £500 extra!, and is AF-S and VR worth that much cash?

I would appreciate any thoughts and love to see some photographs taken with the 80-200mm as you can find 70-200mm examples everywhere LOL

thanks, Dave

Dave,

We have several of both lenses in our stable. I find nothing not to love about the 80-200 quality wise. We don't use the VR feature in our line of work and for the most part I'll be at the 135-200 end of the range more than the 70, so the loss of 10 mm isn't a issue for my uses. If I were buying a lens today (and i am considering it) I'd be content with the 80-200. Too bad the 70-200 doesn't come without the VR.

[Nikonfreak]

Problem with that is that you know the VR lemmings would be crucifying the 70-200 that would come without VR.

The reality is that Nikon needs to update the 80-200 f/2.8 if it's going to remain in the lineup, update the 70-200 f/2.8 VR so as to avoid the newly demonstrated vignette issues and corner softness with the FX sensor, and