The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Nikon 200 mm F2 . I'm just asking

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
:D

I'm just doing research REALLY. I mean it :rolleyes:

Seriously looking around a bit there is the original 200mm F2 G and the newer version II. I can't seem to find where the main problem was with the original to warrant the new Version II. Any research help would be nice and yes its just research.:LOL::LOL::LOL:
 

D&A

Well-known member
Hi Guy,

I've used both versions of the 200 f2 (although not simultaniously) and both versions of the 300 f2.8 (tested together). With regards to the 300 f2.8, both had nanocoating so only difference was the .5-75 f stop advantage when hand holding. Since I generally don't hand hold a 300 f2.8, the differerences between these two lenses was non existent with and without teleconverters. With regards to the two versions of the 200 f2, I don't recall if the older VRI lens had nano coating or not, but don't think it did. I didn't run across flair problems with either version but in specific circumstances, the differences in coating may make a slight difference. Other than that there is the slight increase in efficiency with VR in the newer version and I could sort of see the slight difference when using this lens hand held. Small as it was, it could be detected but if I found a great buy in a VRI version, I would grab it. Other than these two differences, not much real world shooting differences to speak of in 95 percent of situations, except for possible slight reduction of flair shooting towards bright light. I didn't test for flair specifically with either lens.

Best of luck with your "research"...remember it's just research. Keep repeating this phrase whenever the thought crosses your mind to purchase..."Its Just Research". Now repeat after me.... LOL!

Dave (D&A)
 
Last edited:

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
"Its Just Research" I swear it is. LOL

Thanks Dave it sounds like a no brainer as VR is only mildly important for this lens. I would use a monopod most times anyway. I'm after look and a great runway lens.
 
B

BCMielke

Guest
I own the original, but have never shot with with new one. The old one does not have Nano Crystal Coating and is an incredible lens when shot wide open. I also own the 300 f/2.8 and I don't see much difference in sharpness between the two on the Nikon D700. However, the older 2x converter TC20eII? Worked much better on the 200 f/2 than the 300 f/2.8 so I will assume that the 200 f/2 was a better performer. The newer version had better VR and also the Nano. Of the reports that I read there didn't seem to be much difference in sharpness.

As a lens I don't use it much and have considered selling it, but each time I go out and shoot with it and I am reminded why I got it in the first place. There really is nothing like it at f/2.

For those that might ask there is a big difference between the 200 f/2 and the 300 f/2.8. I would sell the 300 before I would sell the 200.

Here is a thread over at Nikon Cafe that spends quite a few posts discussing just this issue.

NikonCafe.com
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
There was a consensus amongst a number of my Nikon shooting friends that with the 200-400VR & 200/2 VR lenses that the VR II version was more a marketing attempt by Nikon to entice people to upgrade at the new higher prices than any quantifiable objective difference in the lenses.

Just saying ...
 

wjlapier

Member
I have first version and it's one of the best Nikon lens I've ever used. AF is smoking fast. Very sharp wide open. Takes the 1.4 TC well with no image degradation or affect to AF speed. I use mine for my kid's activities. Youth volleyball, HS symphonies, and softball, which I shot alot this weekend. It's an all-around great lens. If you use it on a monopod I think you'll be fine with the first version and save a couple thousand.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
It really sounds like the first version would be right up my alley than. The only thing would be nano coating as that may help with flare. I could save 2k on that one alone. Best get some knitting material. LOL
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
:D

I'm just doing research REALLY. I mean it :rolleyes:

Seriously looking around a bit there is the original 200mm F2 G and the newer version II. I can't seem to find where the main problem was with the original to warrant the new Version II. Any research help would be nice and yes its just research.:LOL::LOL::LOL:
As far as I know it is only Nanocoating. And maybe a bit improved VR.

Nothing else.
 

vieri

Well-known member
Guy, the only differences:

- Nano coating;
- New VR, maybe half a stop to one stop difference;
- Different tripod mount;
- Lot of $$ :ROTFL:

Seriously, I wouldn't get the new one if you could get ahold of the old version. On the 300 f2.8, however, it's a different story, and I would get the last VR II version if you need VR, or the AF-s without VR rather than the first VR version. I never used the 400/500/600 so I can't say about these, but it seems that the newer are better from what I hear from friends and colleagues using them.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Thanks you folks are great. It seems like this is a big secret since I could not find much data on it. LOL

One on ebay for pretty good price but no hood. I'll keep my eyes out for one it maybe a month or two before I have the money anyway.

I want Mojo with this D800 and i know this lens has it.
 

D&A

Well-known member
Yes, regarding the hood...for the longest time it wasn't available as I tried to obtain one for use on a Nikon 300mm f2.8 VR I was shooting with indoors and needed the shortest possible hood for shooting in a location that the standard 300mm hood would have been too long and intrusive. My 200mm f2 hood was already in use elsewhere in the venue on the 200 f2 lens. Even Nikon couldn't come up with an extra hood. 18 months later they finally became available but as mentioned, the cost is big $$....a far cry from those $3.00 bargain bin plastic hoods for f4.5-5.6 lenses from years past...LOL.

The $2000.00 additional difference for the 300 f2.8 VRII over it's VR I counterpart is even more questionable since both have nano coating and the only difference is the .5-.75 f stop difference in VR performance, regardless how real it is.

Dave (D&A)
 
Last edited:

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member

onaujee

Member
The VR1 is about $2k less and IMO the better buy and not much difference from the new one... You will love this lens Guy :)
 

wjlapier

Member
The lens doesn't come with a lenscap. I have an after market one but don't like it because it causes the lens to "rock" back and forth when you set it down standing up ( front element down ). I think I'll try the Aquatech version--looks flat.
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Behold! The tale of Guy and a new Lens:

He starts off strong...

I'm just doing research REALLY. I mean it :rolleyes:
Any research help would be nice and yes its just research.:LOL::LOL::LOL:
"Its Just Research" I swear it is. LOL
But then he begins to weaken...

It really sounds like the first version would be right up my alley than. The only thing would be nano coating as that may help with flare. I could save 2k on that one alone. Best get some knitting material. LOL
And before you know it...

Thanks you folks are great. It seems like this is a big secret since I could not find much data on it. LOL

One on ebay for pretty good price but no hood. I'll keep my eyes out for one it maybe a month or two before I have the money anyway.

I want Mojo with this D800 and i know this lens has it.
Congratulations, Guy. What will you "research" next?

:ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:

--Matt
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
You know I thought I was dangerous to YOUR pocketbooks but you guys are killing me here. ROTFLMAO

Think I'm going to rename the forum to GetDPI Black Hole.
 
Top