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 2.0 - Images and Discussion

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Cool, I will check it out. Thanks!:)

I am also looking around for a rental possibility of the 200/2.0 at some point in the summer. In the meantime, I am busy with the other end of the focal length continuum: 14mm :facesmack: Talk about a special use lens! Whoa!
Just a note on the 14... The Nikon is awesome, and if I needed 14 a lot, it would be in my bag. The Sigma ART is also an option, but I've not actually handled or shot with it. BUT for my needs the 14 is used only seldom, and it's usually interiors, where AF isn't all that important. So I gave the little Samyang 14 manual focus a whirl. It is actually an impressive performer, being quite sharp corner to corner. For $350. They even make an AF version now for around $500. I'd definitely look into one of them unless you plan to use it a lot. Then maybe the Nikkor or Sigma would be the way to go. Let's not forget the ZF 15 either...
 

jdphoto

Well-known member
If bokeh is your happy place, take a gander at the 105mm 1.4E. It’s got more reach than the 85mm 1.4 and portrait shooters swear by this lens.
 
Last edited:

dave.gt

Well-known member
Ah, Rick...there you are! I was hoping you would visit this thread.:thumbup:

You have TWO of these lenses!!! Oh, do we need to talk! Do you find any differences with either version of the lens?

Your images are lovely! We have been hoping someone would begin posting their own images and begin discussions.

Thanks!:thumbup:
 

bensonga

Well-known member
Thanks for starting this thread Dave. This is a lens I have often wished I had. As an amateur photographer, the price has simply been above the range I was willing to pay. Maybe someday my resistance will weaken. The images from MJR and Thor are certainly making it much harder to resist.

I did not know about the earlier AIS 200/2. For me, it may be worth considering.

https://matthewdurrphotography.com/2014/07/12/lens-review-nikon-200mm-f2-ai-s-ed/

Wedding photography with Nikon 200 f2 ais manual focus lens a review

Gary
 

Thor

New member
Ah, Rick...there you are! I was hoping you would visit this thread.:thumbup:

You have TWO of these lenses!!! Oh, do we need to talk! Do you find any differences with either version of the lens?

Your images are lovely! We have been hoping someone would begin posting their own images and begin discussions.

Thanks!:thumbup:
Thanks for starting this thread Dave. This is a lens I have often wished I had. As an amateur photographer, the price has simply been above the range I was willing to pay. Maybe someday my resistance will weaken. The images from MJR and Thor are certainly making it much harder to resist.

I did not know about the earlier AIS 200/2. For me, it may be worth considering.

https://matthewdurrphotography.com/2014/07/12/lens-review-nikon-200mm-f2-ai-s-ed/

Wedding photography with Nikon 200 f2 ais manual focus lens a review

Gary
Thanks for the comments guys, yes I have both versions of these two fine lenses and there is some differences besides the obvious of one being manual focus only versus the auto-focus with image stabilization version. A few observations of the differences I've made of the two:

1. After doing quite extensive research before buying the first of the two 200 f2s I found what amounted to three variations of the manual focus version of which mine is the 2nd version, which if memory serves me correctly was made in in 1986? right before Nikon changed the lens slightly to include a removable filter which the prior two did not have as an option.


2. Between the three the optics were stated by most articles I found to be identical with only a slight sharpness edge being reported in the last of the three released or the 200 f2 with the removable filter. I do agree with those findings but ultimately if you buy one of these manual focus lens for mainly portraiture the particular softness of this lens when shot wide open is likely doing you a favor when it comes time to do any post-processing as otherwise the sharpness can make some skin touch-ups take longer than you would like as it can show every imperfection.

3. if anyone should purchase a manual focus 200 f2 it may be worth it to invest in a modified TC-16A adapter for limited auto-focusing which works quite well once you understand its limitations. When using with my D800 the adapter once attached turns the 200 f2 into a roughly 300mm or so 2.8 semi-af lens. The af on the modified TC-16A works extremely well with this lens but of course you must first manually focus on what you are shooting and get it reasonably or close to in focus then hitting whichever button you have selected on the body for auto-focusing.

4. If you choose to not invest in the af adapter and go manual focus only then I can say without a doubt anyone who focuses the first time with that huge, super smooth turning ring will fall instantly and uncontrollably in love, it's that good. Along with that solid metal construction Nikon hit a home run on how good, smooth and easy that lens feels when using it. No other manual focus lens I have feels that way but that beast begs to be used for that feature alone.

5. Having stated how much I love the older version of the modern 200 f2 I find myself using the modern version more often nowadays simply due to the fact that now my wife and I are grandparents and that means taking more and more pictures of the grandchildren who don't stay in one spot for more than a blink of an eye. The auto-focusing on the af 200 f2 is as fast or faster than any other lens I have used which includes many of the newest "G" lenses. Considering how much glass is being moved while focusing I marvel each time I use it at the engineering that went into making that lens. Nothing short of amazing and it almost makes me forget I am shooting with an a now ancient D800 and instead with a more sports/fast action body, lol.

6. In conclusion I shoot fast action with the af 200 while still pulling out the mf version for more static objects such as flowers or seated portraits.

Here are a few taken with the older 200:

DSC00196 by RickZPhoto, on Flickr

DSC_0015_4x6 by RickZPhoto, on Flickr

This shot of the flowers was taken at minimum focusing distance.

DSC_9933_Original by RickZPhoto, on Flickr

A crop of the above flowers.

DSC_9933_ by RickZPhoto, on Flickr

DSC_9934 by RickZPhoto, on Flickr

One of my wife and myself. To get that full body shot I had to walk about 20yds from the tripod after focusing on the wife first. Thank goodness the remote I had could trip the shutter over long distances.

DSC_7670_8x10 by RickZPhoto, on Flickr
 

Thor

New member
Here are a few taken with the older 200:

DSC00196 by RickZPhoto, on Flickr

DSC_6024 by RickZPhoto, on Flickr

DSC_0015_4x6 by RickZPhoto, on Flickr

This shot of the flowers was taken at minimum focusing distance.

DSC_9933_Original by RickZPhoto, on Flickr

A crop of the above flowers.

DSC_9933_ by RickZPhoto, on Flickr

DSC_9934 by RickZPhoto, on Flickr

One of my wife and myself. To get that full body shot I had to walk about 20yds from the tripod after focusing on the wife first. Thank goodness the remote I had could trip the shutter over long distances.

DSC_7670_8x10 by RickZPhoto, on Flickr
 

Thor

New member
More sample portrait images for your viewing pleasure::)

https://500px.com/photo/178451511/exploring-nature-by-sue-ellen-tolman

*Btw:
Photographers who have mastered their artistic expressions should be recognized and given credit for their talent and hard work.
With all due respect those images shown in the link are more a product of post production, digital manipulation than true representations of what any lens, let alone the 200 f2 is able to produce on its own. I've seen all the post production that goes into producing these types of images with even additional bokeh added to the image. The artificial lighting, dodging/burning, vignetting, selective color enhancing and more are done to such extremes it becomes less a photo than a digital painting. That's why "photos" such as those are not included in manufacturers samples of a particular lens. Not arguing anyone personal talent but those images could have been reproduced using a much less expensive lens with a little additional post production.


I believe another well known photographer, a LJH a children's photographer who shoots with the Canon 200mm f2 said it best while critiquing her Russian counterpart, Elena Shumilova who uses Canon glass such as a 50mm & 85mm f1.2 when she was first starting to make a name for herself with her own magical images of children. LJH I believe was explaining the popularity of Elena's photos were more a factor of digital wizardry than what those lenses could actually produce on their own. The same goes with LJH's photos, if you ever see the before/after versions you realize how much digital manipulation actually goes into producing the final image.
 

dave.gt

Well-known member
With all due respect those images shown in the link are more a product of post production, digital manipulation than true representations of what any lens, let alone the 200 f2 is able to produce on its own. I've seen all the post production that goes into producing these types of images with even additional bokeh added to the image. The artificial lighting, dodging/burning, vignetting, selective color enhancing and more are done to such extremes it becomes less a photo than a digital painting. That's why "photos" such as those are not included in manufacturers samples of a particular lens. Not arguing anyone personal talent but those images could have been reproduced using a much less expensive lens with a little additional post production.


I believe another well known photographer, a LJH a children's photographer who shoots with the Canon 200mm f2 said it best while critiquing her Russian counterpart, Elena Shumilova who uses Canon glass such as a 50mm & 85mm f1.2 when she was first starting to make a name for herself with her own magical images of children. LJH I believe was explaining the popularity of Elena's photos were more a factor of digital wizardry than what those lenses could actually produce on their own. The same goes with LJH's photos, if you ever see the before/after versions you realize how much digital manipulation actually goes into producing the final image.
Yes, no doubt!!!

All the amazing images have that in common. Digital wizardry. DW. I must remember that term, DW.:)

That said, your own subject isolation and real world results attract me because of that and the creamy bokeh is wonderful. If one can get that SOOC, it makes DW far easier.

Personally, I am never going very far in DW, but I do go a little ways depending on what I am doing. :)

For me, it is art. And Art with a capital A is what one expresses for oneself. I do not like nervous or harsh bokeh. No amount of manipulation fixes that for me. So, as your images and countless others show, SOOC results are amazing.

To me that is a great starting point!

Thanks again for all your sharing.:thumbup:
 
Last edited:

dave.gt

Well-known member
Now, personally, I apologize in advance if this post seems an angry one, it is not. I have been puzzled why there have been so many people (not you Rick) who have been giving me advice to buy something cheaper "just as good". I find that bad advice, even if well-intentioned. But that is just me,

Why is it bad? Because no one can really make buying decisions for others. It is a personal decision and if I can make it happen by selling my old car so I can make images in a pro bono project at a rehab hospital in Atlanta, with a particular piece of equipment that works for my vision, and it makes those survivors feel better about themselves and their lives, then I am satisfied.

I have found the gift of giving over the past two years, and it has been a profound experience with hundreds of hours and thousands in expenditures. It was worth every sacrifice.

The used D850 I recently purchased has been a huge sacrifice for me but fantastic because I can use it in so many ways. Was it worth skipping meals and car maintenance the past three months? Absolutely. Every worker needs tools and I have only one lens for the D850. What will be the next one to purchase? I do not know but it will be many months from now, as we have other priorities that must be addressed.

That said, I have made no commitment to buying a 200 2.0, this thread was started to see images and learn from others. There have been fewer images posted than I would have preferred. Hopefully more with minimal digital wizardry AND those with amazing results after all the DW, will be posted. I love the high quality images as linked to above. I am certainly not naive about how they were created.

My greatest respect is for those who have worked hard to create their own art.:thumbs:
 
Last edited:

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Now, personally, I apologize in advance if this post seems an angry one, it is not. I have been puzzled why there have been so many people (not you Rick) who have been giving me advice to buy something cheaper "just as good". I find that bad advice, even if well-intentioned. But that is just me,

Why is it bad? Because no one can really make buying decisions for others. It is a personal decision and if I can make it happen by selling my old car so I can make images in a pro bono project at a rehab hospital in Atlanta, with a particular piece of equipment that works for my vision, and it makes those survivors feel better about themselves and their lives, then I am satisfied.

I have found the gift of giving over the past two years, and it has been a profound experience with hundreds of hours and thousands in expenditures. It was worth every sacrifice.

The used D850 I recently purchased has been a huge sacrifice for me becausje I can use it in so many ways. Was it worth skipping meals and car maintenance the past three months? Absolutely. Every worker needs tools and I have only one lens for the D850. What will be the next one to purchase? I do not know but it will be many months from now, as we have other priorities that must be addressed.

That said, I have made no commitment to buying a 200 2.0, this thread was started to see images and learn from others. There have been fewer images posted than I would have preferred. Hopefully more with minimal digital wizardry AND those with amazing results after all the DW, will be posted. I love the high quality images as linked to above. I am certainly not naive about how they were created.

My greatest respect is for those who have worked hard to create their own art.:thumbs:
I said something about alternative lenses in response to pictures taken at f/3.2. In no way did I mean that you should avoid the 200/2, and I apologize if I came across that way.

Matt

PS. NO digital picture appears on screen or in print without a breathtaking amount of digital wizardry. This includes hundreds of decisions made by software engineers and chip designers. Every picture shows an example of what is possible.
 

dave.gt

Well-known member
I said something about alternative lenses in response to pictures taken at f/3.2. In no way did I mean that you should avoid the 200/2, and I apologize if I came across that way.

Matt

PS. NO digital picture appears on screen or in print without a breathtaking amount of digital wizardry. This includes hundreds of decisions made by software engineers and chip designers. Every picture shows an example of what is possible.
Hi, Matt!

No issues from me!:thumbup:

I totally agree. :):):)
 

dave.gt

Well-known member
Ok,

So who has more images to share with the 200/2.0?

I realize this is a very slooooow forum! The only thing we can do is post images, discussions and keep moving. How about it, guys?

There are many people that I personally know who would be interested in your results!:thumbup:
 

Brando

New member
It’s quite a large and cumbersome lens to hand hold for long periods of time, but the results in my opinion are without peer in Nikon system.F404D216-0933-416A-97D8-85611A41A7A9.jpegA162125D-4A2F-4DB7-B099-DFA7419B5D50.jpgDEA24FFC-0EC9-459A-9F40-575EFDE00939.jpgDFF2F1D8-F57F-4ADF-8695-13E2503F085B.jpeg66A59FB3-84CA-42C0-BADE-1DAEE2869218.jpeg9A8271A4-5F4F-481B-97DE-8085DD6D0156.jpeg31001C09-C0D6-4BD4-8552-E42CCC0C281B.jpeg
 

jagsiva

Active member
The 200F2 is a wonderful lens. I have the VRII version and have had it for a few years now. Cost aside, it is a very cumbersome lens to use, but I do lug it around sometimes because the results are worth it for me. I also have the 70/200 2.8 and I find the rendering quite different.

When the 105/1.4 came out, I got one, and I find it has a very similar look to the 200/2. Of course, focal length is different, but framed similarly, the DoF and look are similar. The 200 is still sharper with a snappier AF. I find myself using the 105/1.4 a lot more now simply due to the convenience....but would be very hard to part with the 200.
 

dave.gt

Well-known member
Still loving your images and I still think the 200 2.0 is as good as it gets for what it does.:thumbup:
 
Top